Talk:India at the 2011 Commonwealth Youth Games/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: EarthShocker (talk · contribs) 13:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC) ⓔⓐⓡⓣⓗ ⓢⓗⓞ©ⓚⓔⓡ (talk) 13:48, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.	Link "Previous Commonwealth Youth games " to the page of games. Change "only multiple medals winning" to "only multiple medal winning", remove 's'. Change "Another medallist from Indian side" to " Another medallist from the Indian side". Is there any need to have those red links in the article? Actually these red links will be blue soon (:P). I've them under my user space (Wales, Scotland). — Bill william compton^Talk 16:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Unlink "previous Commonwealth Youth games", as I've asked you to link it in the lede. "edition" is more proper word than "revision". Use "twenty", if you are using "twelve men and eight women" or change all to their numeral form only. The article is not that large, so I don't think that you need to link Malaysia twice.
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.
	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).	Inline citations are missing at some places, but after reading the accompanied prose and table contents, which are properly sourced, everything makes sense.
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Confirm that a search was made for images related to the subject of the article.

ⓔⓐⓡⓣⓗ ⓢⓗⓞ©ⓚⓔⓡ (talk) 16:25, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tried really hard to find any possible Wikipedia compatible images on web, but all I got was disappointment. Although there are some good quality images on Flickr but they are copyrighted. I'd send a request mail to the owner of those images to release them under suitable license.

Thanks for reviewing this article. — Bill william compton^Talk 16:59, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

EarthSchocker has a total of 36 Wikipedia edits, and 14 of them were related to this review. No Wikipedia edits have been made since those 14 were done on April 28. Accordingly, I think we can consider this review abandoned, and by someone who was unlikely to know the GA criteria to begin with. I'll be putting this back into the review pool absent strong and cogent objections. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do it, I've waited long enough. Or, can you review this? Because it will again take one or two months for someone to show mercy on this nomination. — Bill william compton^Talk 03:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bill, I can't review it, unfortunately. But I can put it back into the pack, which I'll do as soon as I've finished posting this comment. There a reviewing drive in the works that will probably start on June 15 and last for a month; those usually hit the backlog pretty hard. Since this is number 18 of 84 sports GANs, I'd guess that the odds are pretty good it'll get swept up before the drive is over. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It's back in the pool. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:15, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]