I will take on this review of Kochi as a good article. I am a relatively new user to GA reviewing doing this as a supplement of my nom of West Bengal. I will after completing the review keep this GA open for a third opinion. In case of a disagreement a third opinion can be sought. I will continue from hereafter by pinging you, as and when I will have time. Happy New Year! — Force Radical ( Talk • Contribs )11:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Shady59-On a preliminary look I would like you to improve the overall sourcing of the article. Please make sure all paragraphs atleast have a citation at their end (which corroborates what is said in the paragraph) and please remove the bare urls.The rest of the review will be done later — Force Radical ( Talk • Contribs )11:15, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Force Radical - Happy New Year to you too. I actually checked for all dead urls before submitting the nomination. Would appreciate if you could point out the ones which you stumbled upon. Meanwhile, I'll check for missing citations & add them. Shady59 (talk) 03:23, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Official Report 1 (Summary before and after fixes according to comments)
1. Well written?:Pass (Worked on during GA review)
2. Verifiable?:Pass (Worked on during GA review)
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass
5. Stable?: Pass
6. Images?: Pass
The article in its current state FailsPasses the GA criteria. The article needs a far more rigorous citation system and there are some layout issues which need to be resolved — Force Radical ( Talk • Contribs )06:52, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Besides this, the article has some layout and grammar issues. I would recommend you to put it up for a copy-edit here. They have a backlog drive going on and if your lucky someone may do the copy-edit within this month. Don't do it now. I'll bring the specific problems up on this page on Monday and you can fix them then. In the mean time give the article your best CE by reading it thoroughly. — Force Radical ∞ ( Talk ⋯ Contribs )11:19, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will be tagging the article with quite a lot of [citation needed] tags (Within this week). Please fill them up with proper citation
I am putting this review On hold for a period of 14 days (during this time feel free to ask anything by pinging me here) after this period I will re-review the article to see if it passes the GA criteria or not — Force Radical ( Talk • Contribs )06:52, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Shady59:-I have taken a look at the changes over the week. I would suggest that you try your best to get rid of the sourcing issues over the weekend. Once that is done I'll start on the prose review.(I expected you to put it up for CE on last Monday but since you didn't I'll bring up the prose problems here and you can solve them .Since with the current status of their backlog it seems unlikely that the article will be accepted before February) — Force Radical ( Talk • Contribs )07:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Force Radical: I'm fixing the sources at the moment. Was busy the past few days & I'm trying to find time in between. But I think I'll be able to fix all the mentioned sources today itself. Shady59 (talk) 09:54, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Force Radical: Meanwhile I've replaced all the dead & suspicious links on the page. The page now has 0 dead/suspicious links. Thanks to the dispenser tool which you suggested. I'm now working on the remaining citations which needs to be added. Shady59 (talk) 10:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Shady59:That's good!! I would suggest you make the article compliant with WP:BURL and give the article a thorough reading and copyedit so that the article will have almost no outstanding problems by Monday when I'll start bringing up the prose problems here. — Force Radical ∞ ( Talk ⋯ Contribs )07:56, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This section will be used after the 7 day waiting period @Shady59:-There is still a some outstanding issues with the article which need to be resolved.Please start solving the issues listed below as and when they are given.(I will take a long time to do this )
With a corporation limit population of 612,343, and metropolitan population of 2.1 million, Kochi city is also a part of the Greater Cochin region, which is the largesturban agglomeration in Kerala and is classified as a Tier-II city by the Government of India.Separate the bold section into another sentence.
Kochi was one of the 28 Indian cities found to be among the emerging 440 global cities
Replace all instances of "industry" in the lede with company
Ancient travellers and tradesmen referred to Kochi in their writings, variously alluding to it as Cocym, Cochym, Cochin, and Kochi.
The Cochin Jewish community called Cochin as Kogin (קוגין), which is seen in the seal of the synagogue[31] which is still owned by the community.[31]
KochiIt rose to significance as a trading centre after the port Muziris around Kodungallur (Cranganore) was destroyed by massive flooding of Periyar in 1341.[36]Please do the same judiciously for other instances as well.
The city is administered by the Kochi Corporation, headed by a mayor.Administered sounds odd here
However, Kochi Police officials defended that in major crimes such as murders and kidnapping, the city registered a low crime rate even behind other cities in the state.[70]Defended whom ?
Thrikkakara is P. T. THOMASI see no reason why that person's name should be in SCREAMING CAPS (Its a pet peeve of mine this caps business).In the same sentences please add conjunctions to smoothen it out.
Construction and manufacturing combined contributes 37%, and trade, tourism and hospitality together provides another 20% Of what ?
India by World Bank, Doing Business Group
tourism is one of the strongest drivers of the local economy.Drivers sounds odd
Social Service Organisation seems to have a problem of undue weight.The last two paragraphs seem to be designed to promote the particular entities mentioned
Please do a through check of the references section I can still see
a Bare Url(http://www.jnnurm.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/KOCHICDP.pdf#page=7) which probably needs to be expanded manually
a google search Ref 73
reference to secondary sources(Other encyclopedia) 39,41,147
References without a proper title 9,55,108,109,110,111,175
Acess dates are missing in quite a lot of references
@Force Radical: Fixed everything mentioned above. By the way, are access dates in all refs necessary? Because even in many featured articles, I see that the access date is missing in a lot of refs. Anyways I always provide access date in all the refs which I personally provide. Thanks again for your efforts. Shady59 (talk) 11:36, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Shady59:-That is a difficult question to answer, I guess except for pdfs,journals and books most of them need access dates to determine if the links are dead or not. I will be promoting this nomination to a GA as I see no outstanding issues — Force Radical∞ ( Talk ⋯ Contribs )12:04, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pass (Worked on during GA review)
Fails
Passes the GA criteria. The article needs a far more rigorous citation system and there are some layout issues which need to be resolved — Force Radical ( Talk • Contribs ) 06:52, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
