Talk:Vedaranyam/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CorrectKnowledge (talk · contribs) 01:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Review in progress —

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.	here
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	here
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).	here
	2c. it contains no original research.	here
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.	No copyright issues with images.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	here
	7. Overall assessment.	here

The article is generally well written and I am happy to see that the style of referencing is consistent throughout. I'll list issues with the article over the next few days, but there are no immediate concerns. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 01:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer's edits: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]

Prose

" ...is said to have visited Vedaranyam to expiate the sin arising out of killing the demon king Ravana."... is close paraphrasing of the source.

Done - reworded.

"The Vedas worshipped Shiva here on account of the sanctity attached to the Vedaranyeswarar temple."... causality is inverted here. Because Vedas worshipped God (note: the source does not say Shiva even if it seems obvious from the cultural context) here the place is sacred and not vice versa.

Done - i have merged the two sentences. "Veda" + "aranayam" + "Eeswaarar" gives the etymology - meaning Shiva worshipped by Veda. God still seems common to me - Shiva would be specific.

In the second paragraph of the history section, terms such as "region", "province" etc. need to be clarified.

Done - reworded.

"The town is named after the central deity of ..."... do you mean presiding deity?

Done - the Sapthavidangam temples always have this confusion. Presiding/central are not the same, but modified for readability.

"Vedaranyam is known from medieval Chola period..."... "known from" is ambiguous. Do you mean that the town originated/is first mentioned in religious texts or other historical records in the medieval Chola period?

Done - caveat added

"...to strike against the sales tax..."... strike → protest.

Done

With the exception of constituency and the legislative position everything else in the first two sentences is duplicate. Try merging them into one sentence.

Done

"is administered by the Vedaranyam municipality, that..."... that → which

Done

"...as a redresal to the war against..."... redresal → redressal, ...to a atone for the war... would be better.

Done

"...Vedas worshipped god on account of the sanctity attached to place..."... I am afraid causality is still inverted here. The place became sacred only after Vedas worshipped god. To put it in similar terms, the place attained sanctity on account of Vedas having performed worship of god here.

Done - trimmed the sanctity part.

"did a salt march in parallel..."... did → started or any other better word.

Done

"Vedaranyam nose" needs to be defined/described briefly. You have used it multiple times.

Done

"Due to the raise of tertiary rocks in the Pattukottai..."... Do you mean due to rise of tertiary rocks? Is Pattukottai– Mannargudi region downstream? If so, this line would make more sense.

Done

"...marine activity in the shores down Vedaranyam..."... grammatically incorrect, ambiguous.

Done - reworded

"The quality of ground water in less..." → is poor.

Done

"The images from the satellite IRS 1A shows the ancient sea was near Thiruthuraipoondi and has regressed up to Vedaranyam in modern times."... it's not clear where Thiruthuraipoondi is or why the regression of the ancient sea has made Vedaranyam a coastal town (assuming that is what you want to say).

Done - reworded

"...the dance with the gait of a swan."... is just hanging disconnectedly at the end of he sentence. It would be better to include this in a bracket ahead of Hamsapthanathaanam.

Done - reworded

The new reference added mentions the fact that Vedas worshipped Shiva. You can change god → Shiva citing this reference.

Done - reworded

"Kodiyakarai" does not really describe Vedaranyam nose. Have a look at this map (zoom out a bit). The nose shaped coastline is quite obvious from it. A one line referenced graphic description of this is needed, a map would be helpful but it's not necessary.

Not sure if i can get a graphic description. Also as you mentioned, nose obviously points the shape and there is not much of significance attached.

"The quality of ground water in poor compared to..."... in poor is incorrect. Do you mean the quality of ground water in Vedaranyam is poor...?

Done - reworded

"According to Hindu legend, Rama..."... one Hindu legend has already been described in the previous sentence. "According to another Hindu legend..." will be better.
"visited Vedaranyam to absolve sins committed..."... absolve himself of sins commtitted...
Please use "Sambandar" (or Tirugnanasambandar) consistently throughout. Alternating between the two will confuse uninitiated readers.
Marathas are mentioned in the lead, but there is nothing about them in the history section.
"The region and Tanjore..."... change to "Negapatam and Tanjore..." for clarity.
Why are we using Cauvery and not Kaveri?
"The traditional occupation of salt marshes..."... salt manufacturing? Marshes can't be an occupation.
"preceded by prawn cultivation" → preceded only by prawn cultivation
This part: "According to legend, a Chola king named Mucukunta obtained a boon from Indra... but the king chose the right image installed at Thyagaraja Temple, Tiruvarur." has many prose issues. "...to receive an image of Thyagaraja from the chest of Hindu god Vishnu" makes no sense. Start with how Vishnu created Somaskanda to rid himself of a curse that had befallen him when he dishonoured Parvati. Then move on to the fact that the image was gifted to Indra who in turn sought to present the image to Muchukunda for his help in the war against the Asuras. Finally, talk about the test and how the six images were installed at various temples. Right now the legend is difficult to understand and chronologically jumbled up.
Salt Sathyagraga Memorial Stubi... the reference says Salt Sathyagraga Memorial Stupe, one of them is incorrect.
Ayuirvedic Medicinal Forest → Ayurvedic Medicinal Forest

Done - all the above items are fixed. Cauvery, Tirugnanasambandar maintained uniformly. Didnt find reliable source for Marathas - one ref state village transfer, but unreliable.

"...absolve his sins..."... absolve someone from his sins would be the correct usage.
"...Vishnu who worshipped Thyagaraja to get rid of his curse..."... get rid of a curse he incurred; "his curse" is ambiguous.
"...but the king chose the right image installed at Thyagaraja Temple, Tiruvarur."... needs to be phrased better. Did the king choose an image which was already installed in the temple at Tiruvarur?
It's alright to use Cauvery consistently, but why are we using this spelling when the article is titled Kaveri?

Done - first three addressed. Cauvery is consistently used to maintain consistency with Cauvery delta.

Verifiability

The following source: Bhargava, Gopal K. (2006). Land and people of Indian states and union territories. 25. Tamil Nadu. Delhi: Kalpaz Publications. ISBN 81-7835-381-4. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) used as a reference in 3 different places in the article is unreliable. Kalpaz Publications is same as Gyan Publishing House a listed Wikipedia Mirror[6] and a known problematic publisher. For more details see RSN about Gyan and RSN which includes Kalpaz.

Removed

The reference Agnihotra for wealth, health and happiness by P.C., Ganesan (2005) is also problematic. Sura books doesn't appear to be an academic/fact–checking publisher and other books written by the author fall into the self-help category. The ''Agnihotra for wealth... reference used in this article makes claims pertaining to science and health benefits for which it would be completely unreliable. I don't see why it should be considered WP:RS for any other claims.

Removed

Ref #4 is duplicated at the end of first paragraph of history section.

Removed

"According to a Tamil legend, the Vedas personified as human beings locked the gates of the temple after worshipping Shiva."... the citations at the end of paragraph do not support this statement. Please add the appropriate reference.

Done

"The royal patronage continued to the temples in the region during the rule of the Nayaks, Vijayanagar kings and Marathas."... citation after the sentence does not support it.

Done

"...and Gujarat Heavy Chemicals, also have huge salt manufacturing facilities here. The industry provides direct and indirect employment to over 10,000 people."... needs to be referenced.

Done

"The religious geography changed after the conversion of Pallava king Mahendravarman I to Hinduism under the aegis of Saiva saint Appar."... needs an incline citation.

Removed - felt undue, so removed.

The new reference added: Various (2007). Tourist guide to Tamil Nadu. Chennai: T. Krishna Press. ISBN 81-7478-177-3. is also published by Sura books and is not attributed to any author, which is not unexpected of a tourist guide book. Please replace it.

Done -oops.

"The Vedaranyam canal was used for inland transportation system."... reference this or even better, remove it. This does not fit into any of the paragraphs.

Done

"Vedaranyam municipality does not have underground drainage system and the current sewerage system for disposal of sullage is through septic tanks and public conveniences."... needs an inline citation.

Done

"The town is the base for tourist destinations like... distance of 37 km (23 mi) from the town."... Ayurvedic Medicinal Forest, Historical Light House etc. don't appear to be supported by Ref #35.
- Not done The new reference does not mention any of the tourist destinations.

Fixed - wrong link because of copy paste - fixed.

I am not sure what Ref #14 is supposed to be. It currently reads University of Allahabad. Dept. of Modern Indian History, University of Kerala. Dept. of History, University of Kerala, University of Travancore (2003). Journal of Indian History. 82. Department of History, University of Kerala. p. 33.?? Please also link the journals, if you can.
Delete references you are not using, like the broken R., Jayaraman (2010) (PDF) reference at the end of the references section.

Done - all above addressed.

Please provide page numbers for pdfs to make the information easier to verify.

i just see i havent addressed this - the browser broke, let me fix the missing ones.

Done - added page numbers for the pdf refs. For one journal, i couldn't find link.

"The railway line is not operational after the 90s."... needs citation.

Done

"Vedaranyam is administered by a second grade municipality... on 9 August 2010."... please use the correct URL for the reference. About municipality should be used instead of About city.

Done

"The Negapatam region... was briefly captured by French troops lead by Lally (1702–66 CE) in 1759 CE." needs an inline citation. The reference at the end of the paragraph does not support this. In fact, it refers to Negapatam (is this same as Nagapattinam?) as dutch territory.

I have added a reference. Negapatam was a Dutch territory (French and British later) - but the ceding of 277 villages doesn't mention the location of Vedaranyam. But it is clear that Vedaranyam was part of larger setup in the Tanjore district.

Both the sfn and lfn of Ref #16 are misspelt "National cyclopaedia". Moreover, the sfn is not clickable because you've used different years of publication.

Fixed.

NOR

"Buddhism and Jainism were the dominant religions in the region during the 5th–7th centuries."... the reference at the end of the sentence does not mention Buddhism at all in this context. Vedaranyam is mentioned as a major Jain centre, but there is nothing about a dominant religion. Please add another reference or reword it accordingly.

Done - reworded.

Ref #4,5 do not do not deal with the etymology of Vedaranyaranyeswarar or Vedaranyam. Therefore, "...giving the name "Vedaranyaranyeswarar" to the presiding deity of the temple and "Vedaranyam" to the place"... is original research. Ref #4 mentions that the place is sacred because Vedas are thought to have worshipped God here, but the connection to "Vedaranyam" is not established.

ref added.

"...giving the name "Vedaranyaranyeswarar" (Thirumaraikadar as per Tevaram) to the presiding deity of the temple"... the new reference supports the etymology of "Vedaranyam", but the connection to "Vedaranyaranyeswarar" is still unreferenced. Add an appropriate citation or remove this part.
"The Nayanmars (Saiva saints) Appar and Tirugnanasambandar could not enter the locked temple... Appar sung devotional hymns at the end of which the gates were locked". This part in Etymology and legend section is not supported by either of the references. Ref #9, translates the verses used by Apparswami to open the gate, while Ref #10 states, "Appar and Sundarar competed to sing and show their talents at this place. 11 Tamil songs to open the gates of the temple happened here. Because of the curse which happened during that time, still now most of the people use the back door to enter the temple." None of them support the phrasing used in the article. Please reword it to better represent the sources.

Done - reworded and added ref.

"The Vedaranyeswarar temple located in the centre of the town is the most prominent tourist location in Vedaranyam."... the claims about prominence and location are not supported by Ref #35.
"The municipality maintains a bus stand that accommodates local as well as long distance buses. Bus is the primary mode of public transport from the town."... none of these conclusions can be drawn from Ref #3.
"The town became part of Nagapattinam district since January 1997 when the Nagapattinam district was created as a separate district."... not supported by Ref #20.
"There is one police station in the town."... not supported by the reference, doesn't seem very likely either. The single phone number in the website is probably for the control room.

Done - all above four fixed.

Images

Caption of this image in the geography section is inappropriate. A caption about swamps would be more relevant to the adjoining text rather than the current one on tourism.

Done - reworded.

The caption is still not relevant to the section. Kodiyakkarai wildlife sanctuary lies in eastern section of the swamp, which itself is covered in some detail in the adjacent paragraph. The caption should be changed to represent the sanctuary as a swamp rather than a "prominent tourist spot".

The current pic looks like a swamp, but i couldn't get much better pics of the sanctuary. The district/municipal website quote it as the most prominent tourist spot. I have modified caption.

Fixed by reviewer.

MOS

There are WP:OVERLINK issues in the article. For instance, Tiruchirappalli has been linked twice in the same paragraph. There are tools to correct this, use them at your leisure. Compliance with MOS:LINK is not a part of GA criteria.
This article has around 15000 characters (15113 to be precise). Per WP:LEADLENGTH two paragraphs in the lead would be appropriate.
This sentence in the lead: "The town has thirteen schools and a government University Model College." is not notable, important or something that is widely covered in the sources. It should go.
Ref #3 in the lead is not required per WP:LEADCITE.

Done - above 4. For links, there would be one in lead/infobox and other in sections.

Comments from other users

What is a "second grade municipality"? Is there a page on Wikipedia that can explain this? Mattximus (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done - it is based on revenue - i have linked the same. Ssriram mt (talk) 01:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Not done unfortunately, nowhere in the page you linked has the words "second grade municipality", but I assume it is the same as "Grade II"? Must be consistent. Mattximus (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The municipal website states "second grade" and i preferred to use the same way. This is the case with the municipality websites in the state i have come across. You are right that Grade II equals second grade municipality.Ssriram mt (talk) 13:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't link second grade to Local administration in Tamil Nadu, it's misleading. The Vedaranyam municipality website also uses "II Grade"[7]. If this is the standard across other WP articles, it's better to use it here as well. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 20:51, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added footnotes and delinked. Ssriram mt (talk) 23:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Passed

I see no reason to delay this any further. All the issues raised above have been addressed by the nominator. The prose is clear and concise and meets 1a, it could still use a copy–edit though. Congratulations to Ssriram for creating such an interesting article and thank you for replying promptly and patiently to what was a relatively long review. Correct Knowledge^«৳alk» 01:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]