Talk:Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad/GA2
Appearance
GA Reassessment
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Currently identified problems
[edit]- Copyright violations; I've removed one section already and there are more that require checking
- Content not in source: e.g. "The Post-Graduate Programme in Agribusiness Management (PGP-ABM) is a two-year fully residential management programme." -- the linked source doesn't mention anything about this
- Primary sources and poor quality press releases: Contentious and flowery content sourced to the institute's website.
- Neutrality: Reuse of press releases doesn't give a story, instead it presents disjointed statements (e.g. the architecture section)
- Scope: The article is very limited in scope and reads more like a PowerPoint presentation and does not cover any of the listed titles in a proper manner.
These issues would mean a quick fail at GAN, but I'm bringing it here to see if it can be fixed instead of being delisted. —SpacemanSpiff 18:00, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Here's the link about PGP-ABM now known as PGP-FABM, the official site has not yet changed the name everywhere.Esperanza 1409 (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2015 (UTC) [1]
- This article does not deserve GA status. It is being continuously disrupted by IP promotional edits from IIMA itself. Sigmabaroda (talk) 03:56, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- Here's an assessment based on the criteria:
- Well written:
- Disjointed sections, no flow within the article, found some copyvios, there may be more.
- Verifiable with no original research:
- Mostly primary sources, press releases; a lot of unsourced content.
- Broad in its coverage:
- Weak on history, organizational structure, location/architecture etc while heavy on recent news.
- Neutral:
- Not neutral as sections are used to promote a certain point of view.
- Stable:
- Unstable with constant back and forth between multiple points of view.
- Illustrated, if possible, by images:
- Reasonable use of images, properly licensed.
Based on the above assessment I'm delisting the article. —SpacemanSpiff 12:12, 16 November 2015 (UTC)