Talk:Chennai/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: MPJ-DK (talk · contribs) 01:34, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I will be picking up the review of this one - both for the Wiki Cup and the GA cup as well. I am a bit hessitant due to the size but considering how long it has been sitting around it deserves to get reviewed, so why not. I normally plug in my review comments over a day or so, this one probably more than that. And I will be checking on the FA review that got it demoted too, to see if any of the mentioned issues would stand in the way of GA if they remain unresolved.

Side note, I would love some input on a Featured List candidate (Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship) and a Featured Article candidate (CMLL World Heavyweight Championship). I am not asking for Quid pro Quo, but all help is appreciated. MPJ-US 01:34, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Toolbox

I like to get this checked out first, I have found issues using this that has led to quick fails so it's important this passes muster.

Copyright violations Tool

Tool gets a hit for a possible copyright violation issue with article - http://www.gte-india.com/chennai.php - but I am not sure who copied who. I will do some research to see if I can find out who was the originator.

Another issue with article - http://madras.trade/city

Again I will check to see if I can determine who copied who

And this one - http://www.touristlink.com/india/chennai/overview.html

And one more - http://www.e-perpustakaan.com/chennai-city-area-list/

Overlap in phrases detected against url - thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/plenty-of-houses-few-affordable/article4065091.ece - this should be addressed in the wikipedia article.

"Of the existing housing stock in Chennai, about 2,00,000 houses are not in good condition. Either new houses are needed or there should be assistance to rebuild. About 26,000 households live in houses without any room and another 4,27,000 families — with an average size of five members — live in small dwelling units with only one room."

More overlap - http://thehindu.com/news/cities/chennai/chennai-consumes-20-of-the-power-of-the-state/article5934753.ece

"the peak power consumption is for four months between May and August, with the city consuming the highest during June."

And again - http://thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/real-estate/chennai-in-top-25-real-estate-destinations-in-asiapacific-pwc-survey/article5444391.ece

"emerged in the top 25 real estate destinations list in the Asia Pacific region."

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-07-16/chennai/29781077_1_global-hospitals-bed-strength-nj-gowrishankar

"his works to 2.1 beds per 1,000 population against the national average of less than 1 bed per 1,000 population"

Disambiguation links

No issues Y

External links

Quite a few issues that need to be resolved N and this part is not a review of the reliabiity of the sources as such.

The following resources are listed as dead

4
80
111
115
116
118
131
158
134
188
195
198
213
237
241
279
287
289
313
326
114

Sources that are "likely dead"

276
286
293
308
333
344

Connection Issue

59
The "Censusindia" link
6
193
25
291
397

Possible issues, several that redirect to a "crufty url"

34
78
74
98
120
117
137
142
136
191
185
181
189
187
216
218
233
236
232
295
267
282
319
296
300
301
318
316
321
328
327
336
upenn.edu
339
360
338

Reference #79 requires registration - needs to be indicated in the citation.
Reference #338 requires registration - needs to be indicated in the citation.

The following references should have the Accessdate added

15
17
23
26
29
180
205
256
285
323
350
331
389

Sources mixes date formats, some are 28 December 2012, while others are 2015-12-11. They should all be consistent.

Source 62, can we please remove the "see more" url?

General review

infobox

the "city of life" nickname is only mentioned here and not sourced
"Detroit of Asia", elsewhere listed as "of India" or "of South Asia", only "of India" is sourced
Reference 1 does not actually state the "official" language?
No citations for the government type, body, Deputy, commission
Reference 5 does not seem to cover anything in the Population section
The rest is unsourced too.

Lead

Missing space "world.Chennai"
"foreign tourists, and" does not need the comma
"Chennai confronts substantial pollution", not sure a city can "confront", I would suggest "experiencs"

Etymology

The sentence starting with "The first official use of the name Chennai" should be moved to be after the second theory of the origin of the city name.
No mention of Chennapatnam being used as a name for the general area? it's in reference 22
Source does not support the name being on a sales deed in 1639
Madraspatnam predated the British, but the source does not support the claim that "Madras" did too.
If the temple was constructed in 1646, according to it's article, and the name Chennai was first seen in 1639 then that theory does not actually add up mathematically?
Reference 28, states that the British were granted land, did not mention a city. The source also does not state that its uncertain if it was used prior.
The article in 30 lists the word "madhu-ras", not "madhuras" and offers the translation of "honey", not the other two suggestions in the article.
No sources for the last sentence?
"different theories for", replace "for" with "of"
", to Francis Day" the word "to" does not makr sense when tying back to "sale deed"
"with the temple regarded", should be "with the temple being regarded"
"fishing-village" is not hyphenated
"Vijayanagar-era" should gave a link
"changed", no need to link this, we all know what "changed" means.

Note This section seems to be a mish-mash of facts, interpretations, and sources that do not seem to support what's stated. I had to check a lot of sources to ensure they matched the content they were supposed to cite. With so many dead links it's really hard to check all this out. First impression of the netutrality of the aricle is not good.

History

I won't really comment on this section until it has been appropriately reduced.

Geography

Reference 63 is for "Detroit of India", not the claim of "gateway to South India"
Reference 67 is not specific for anything just mentioned, neither the existence of rivers nor pollution.
Title for reference 68 does not match the article title.
Reference 68 talks about the beautification and yes issues of dumping and sewage, but does not decribe it as "heavily polluted"
Title for reference 69 does not match the article title.
The remaining part of the paragraph only sources pollution, not the lakes etc.
Not sure what reference 73 is supposed to cover in the preceding sentences?
Too much information, since there is a Main article listing all the various areas is not necessary here.
The statement "considerably improved" seems to ignore reference 74 stating "marginally improved"
"banks and coasts, and" does not need the comma

Geology

Is there a link for "geotectonic"?
Reference 77 states that Chennai is in zone 2, not 3. Which one is it?
Reference 77 does not seem to cover anything state in the article?

Flora and fauna

Does source 79 cover everything in the preceding text? Since I don't have a log in I have to ask, but the title of the reference does not seem to indicate so.
No source for the Madras Naturalists' Society claims
No source for Guindy National Park
Reference 83 does not support the claim that they were the first

Climate

Reference 90 is useless since it does not indicate where Chennai is nor clearly label the "thermal equator"
No translation for " Kathiri Veyyil"?
Reference 92 seems to be unrelated to the sentence it is used on?
PDF in reference 93 needs to indicate which page considering there are 84 pages
No sources for "The city gets most of its seasonal rainfall from the north–east monsoon winds, from mid–October to mid–December. Cyclones in the Bay of Bengal sometimes hit the city." nor any details beyond "sometimes"?
Reference 97 seems to only cover parts of the claims made.

Administration

I won't really comment on this section until it has been appropriately reduced.

Law and order

As above

Politics

As above

Utility services

As above

Architecture

I won't really comment on this section until it has been appropriately reduced

Demographics

the 7,088,000 numbers need a date to put in historical perspective.
Lakh should be linked first time it's used as it's not a commonly used unit, or even better avoid it all together
Again PDF sources need to indicate what page it's using.
No reference for Marwais, Telugus, Gujaratis and Malayalees?
Reference 196 is not specific enough, I had to click through to get more info

Housing

How can you live in a house without any room?
"About 26,000 households live in houses without any room and another 427,000 families (with an average size of five members) live in small dwelling units with only one room." is basically taken from the artice, replacing "-" with "("
Source for the "65 shelters" claim?

Museums and art galleries

The terms "important" and "noteworthy" are not stated in the sources, making them an OR claim.

Music and performing arts

Reference 206 does not support the claims of "major center" of art and culture.
No reference for being known for it's classical dance shows
Reference 213 does not seem to support the claim of "importance"

Cityscape

I see no indications in reference 217 that the division of North/South etc. is anthing more than a direction indicator, not regions as such.
Claims of expansion along Old Mahabalipuram Road is not supported in 217, just that it was reclassified. Which is not the same.
Is "Central Madras" a specific region or should it be "central Chennai"?
Source 218, the map does not source anything since it does not indicate residential elements, tourist visits or financial district.

Tourism and hospitality

Need source for the nationality of the tourists.

Entertainment

Should this list the article "Tamil cinema as the main article?
Reference 229 states that english language plays are "gaining a foothold", which is not the same as a general statement on "being popular"

Recreation

"Zoo, beaches, and wildlife parks form the primary recreation areas of the city.", could be left out completly.
A large degree of the facts mentioned for the Madras Crocodile Bank Trust is not covered by reference 232.
The word "Arignar" does not even appear in reference 233
"The city boasts two", replace "boasts" with "has"
No source for those beach being popular?
Birding claim unsourced?
" located in the downtown." should end with "downtown area"
MGM Dizzee World?
Source for the golf course being famous?

Shopping

First reference says 1 mall, 2nd reference is dead, 3rd reference says they're planning on building malls. Yet the article states there are several malls.?? that does not add up.
Source for Phoenix Mall says it's 2 days old, hard to claim it being major after 2 days. The rest have no sources to even confirm existence.

Economy

I won't really comment on this section until it has been appropriately reduced.

Communication

MTS, Relaince CDMA, Tata Docomo CDMA" needs an "and" before Tata Docomo CDMA

Power

Listing all power plants pushes this into the yellow pages territory, is that really necessary to understand this section?
Stating that availability has become a concern, then eradicated just reads weird. The section was obviously written at 2-3 different points in time and never updated in general, just had sentences added. SHould be reworded.

Banking

Reference 305 does not seem to support most of the claims made.
No reference for the 1770 or 1786 claims?
"the Madras Bank, then known as the 'Government Bank', started functioning again from 1806.", yet the article never stated that it stopped functioning?
the erstwhile Bharat Overseas Bank" remove the word "erstwhile"
Not sure why the first Sri Lankan bank deserves special mention? Could be removed and the article would be no worse off.

Health care

Is there a source for the use of the term "world-class"?
Considering this is a summary I believe the list of hospitals is unnecessary, again it is not the yellow pages and the main article should cover that.
"Chennai attracts about 45 percent of health tourists from abroad", out of what? all heath tourists everywhere? in India? please specify.
so 12,500 beds - 5,000 in one kind, 6,000 in another... and the remaining 1,500??
"This works to 2.1 beds" should be "This works out to be 2.1 beds"
No citation of the claim that this is higher than any other indian city.

Waste management

Should mention the issues outlined in reference 322, that moving the dumpsites do not solve the problems, just move them elsewhere. This is one of the issues that would go against "neutral" as the article generally seems devoid of anything negative and in this case it selects to pick only something from the article that is neutral.

Transport

I won't really comment on this section until it has been appropriately reduced.

Air

Same

Rail

Same

Road

Same

Sea

Media

Again with a main article listing out all the newspapers here is too much, it reads like the yellow pages or a company directory.
Same with TV channels, that is the point of a main article and a summary - a summary is not just a list of channels though.

Education

"Chennai has a mix of public and private (some of which also receive financial support from the government) schools." should be "Chennai has a mix of public and private schools, some of which also receive financial support from the government."
No source for the Montessori system
No sources for the college section?
No source for the CSIR claim
"Thirty-fifth edition of the fair was held in 2012." should start with "The"

Sports and recreation

I won't really comment on this section until it has been appropriately reduced.

City based teams

Same

Foreign missions

No need to list the location of the FRRO here in a summary section.

Sources/verifiable

All book sources need page indicators
All PDF based sources need page indicators
All book sources need the location indicated

1 - Date needed
4 - Needs more info added to the citation
5 - Date needed
10 - Seems to not go to a specif census?
Is A.T. Kearny a Reliable Source?
Spottedbylocals.com an RS?
17 - Date needed
18 - Date needed
livemint (#20), an RS?
Hubert-herald.com an RS?
Some newspaper sources have a location listed, others do not, please provide locations for all printed sources
theconstructor.org, an RS?
listofszoos.com, an RS?
classzone.com, an RS?
97 - has an url, no title listed
chennaimagic.com, an RS?
madrasmusings.com, an RS?
- onamfestival.org, an RS?
go-nxg.com, an RS?
samaylive.com, an RS?
blog.euromonitor.com, an RS?
magcbricks.com, an RS?
lboro.ac.uk, an RS?
rediff.com, an RS?
99acres.com, an RS?
truthdive.com, an RS?
aai.aero, an RS?

Broad in coverage

History section - the "History of Chennai" should be listed as the "main" article and this section can then be reduced to a higher level overview.
The Administration section links to 'Administration of Chennai", since that article exists means this section should not be THIS detailed, that's the point of the main article.
Economy, has a "main" article listed, there is way too much detail in this section when there is a seperate article. Too much repetition between section and article.
Transport, has a "main" article listed - once again I would say there is too much detail in this section, overlap with the seperate article.
Sports, has a "main" article listed - once again I would say there is too much detail in this section, overlap with the seperate article.

Illustrated / Images

File: Surrender of The City of Madras 1746.jpg needs a "U.S. Public Domain" tag
File: MadrasAutomobilesLtd1914.JPG has some copyright issues called out on the page that should be addressed
Very few images have "alt" texts

Comments

Sources should not be in the lead but where the information is presented in the body of the text, considering there are 14 sources in the lead that is quite excessive. I have not checked yet but sources in the leads me to suspect that the cited facts are not in the body of the text.
"Detroit of South Asia" is later listed as "Detroit of India" and the source supports that phrase too.
Fourth-largest city and fourth-most populous is not in the body of the article.
36th-largest urban area, not in body?
"to 82,790, in 2011" not in the body?
Neither "Lonely Planet" claims are in the body??
Global CIties Index, not in the body
"Best City" in india, not in the body
"Hottest city", not in the body
2nd best food city, not in the body
Third-highest GDP, not in the body.
So the article is HUGE, but there are so many things in the lead that's ONLY in the lead - the purpose of the lead is to summarize the article, not introduce new facts. The lead needs to be totally reworked and the cited facts need to be worked into the main part of the article.

@QatarStarsLeague: - I am not even half way through looking at the article in detail and I have scores of issues already listed, primarily sources not covering statements made, unsourced statements or what looks like original research as it states facts not in the sources. I am not sure what shape this article was in when it was originally made a Feature Article, but right now I have to say that it needs a LOT of work to become a Good Article. I will continue my review and provide feedback for everything to complete it, just wanted to share my initial assessement of the current state of the article. MPJ-US 15:03, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Additional general comment - The large number of dead sources is a concern, especially coupled with the fact that I have found a lot of instances where the claim and the reference does not line up. It is making it hard to verify large parts of the article. MPJ-US 15:49, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At this point in time I have found so many issues that need to be addressed that I am going to put the article on hold to allow for updates to be made. Please let me know if/when you want me to review changes, updates etc. MPJ-US 17:08, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@QatarStarsLeague: - it's been around six days since I put it on hold and I have seen no effort to improve it. If I do not see any improvements by tomorrow I will be forced to fail this. If you start on it and need more time to address the issues I am fine with keeping it open longer. MPJ-US 00:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not seeing much activty on mt review points, nor has anyone indicated they are picking this up. Too much work left, failing. MPJ-US 22:31, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]