Talk:Rajendralal Mitra/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: L293D (talk · contribs) 02:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are several problems with this article:

The lead is much too sort. Try to get at least 10-15 lines of text in there (see HMS Sportsman).
The references are not all reliable; wikimapia.org allows users to input text AFAIK
The article has a very inconsistent citation style, using sfn in some places and full book cites in others.
Most {{cite book}} templates are missing important parameters, such as isbn or publisher.

Right now I am failing this GAN, feel free to renominate once the issues are fixed. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

L293D, not writing the lead was an error on my part and it's not sort but short. But that does hardly entitle you to behave like a jerk.

Which of the references apart from the Wikimapia one (which may be removed, without causing any problems to the text) seems to be remotely unreliable to you? How much time it would have taken you to remove that part. ref?

Who told you that GA demands a consistent citation style? And, how much time does it take to incorporate such glosses?

What makes you think that books that predate the introduction of ISBN will come with them? Or do you feel that any book without an ISBN is de-facto unreliable? ∯WBG^converse 10:59, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'ts simple. Just write the lead and renominate. I'm not very knowledgeable in this area, and perhaps an other reviewer won't nitpick about the refs. I wish you the best of luck for your future GA nominations. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:10, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]