Talk:First Banerjee ministry

First Banerjee ministry was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 11, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 3, 2011.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Sabitri Mitra and Mamata Banerjee are the only women in the 38-member Cabinet of West Bengal?

Skip to table of contents

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

India: West Bengal / Politics High‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject West Bengal (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as Top-importance).

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Council of Ministers of West Bengal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 18:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator: Avenue X at Cicero

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Where there is substantial prose, the prose is quite good.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	There are significant problems. See below.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	The "Election database" link (footnote 2) is not live. Besides that, it seems fine, for the information that is sourced.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	See problems below.
	2c. it contains no original research.	I cannot tell, since so much information in unsourced.
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	See below.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Not a problem.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Not a problem.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Not a problem.
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Image and sound files are free and sourced.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images and sound file are relevant. Captions are good (though complete sentences need full-stops).
	7. Overall assessment.	This article does not pass our GA criteria at this time.

There are many good things about this article. The prose is well written, it's well illustrated, etc. But there are three main problems.

On of the main problems with the article is that it does not follow our Wikipedia:Manual of Style in its organization. For instance, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, a proper lede should summarize all sections of the body of the article, without introducing any new information that is not in the article elsewhere. This lede doesn't do that. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Embedded lists, the article should convert lists to prose wherever possible, often separating out lists into their own articles. So in this case, the sections from the Indian Constitution should be summarized and rephrased into text, with sources to the actual wording. Consider separating out the long list of members into its own article, as United States Senate is a separate article from List of current United States Senators. Also, the duplication of information in "Cabinet Ministers" and "Ministers of State" is non-standard.

As to criterion 3b, the article contains very little about the history of the council. There is ample info about the present make-up, but too little about the council before 2011 elections. The section on "Government and politics" is very good, but it is too little information for such an important topic. Again, see the difference between United States Senate and List of current United States Senators for comparison.

The third problem is with the sourcing. The material that's currently in the lede (which should really be in other sections, so that the lede can be a summary) is not sourced at all. The sourcing for the list is spotty, with some items sourced explicitly and others not. In the "Government and Politics" section, sourcing begins near the end of the first paragraph, with most of that paragraph's material unsourced.

Even though the article is not ready for "Good Article" status at this time, I see that you have done quite a lot of work on the article, from its creation up to its present state. I hope that you'll continue to improve this and other articles. If these issues are all addressed, feel free to renominate the article for GA status at a later time. All the best, – Quadell ^(talk) 19:24, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Council of Ministers of West Bengal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110516052659/http://eciresults.nic.in/Statewises25.htm to http://eciresults.nic.in/statewiseS25.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mamata Banerjee ministry (2011–15). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020818174411/http://www.indiatogether.org/states/bengal.htm to http://www.indiatogether.org/states/bengal.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:16, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Flag of West Bengal.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:39, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]