Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Operation Python/1

Operation Python

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: No consensus to delist – there is disagreement about the reliability and independence of sources, which is not completely resolved after 7 months of discussion. Femke (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all the sources are to two Indian commanders who were involved in the battle, most notably the head naval commander. Does not used independent reliable sources. Bumbubookworm (talk) 00:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Zawed, who I think has a pretty good grasp on what constitutes a GA. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:46, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add that a) from what I can tell, Afsir Karim was not involved in Operation Python despite his involvement in the Indo-Pakistani War, and b) the Hiranandani sources are reputably published and used properly. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:53, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to a ping, presumably sent as I reviewed this article for GA back in 2017. I see some additional sources have been added since my review and these presumably are what is of concern? Karim appears to be only used once for a fact that seems non-controversial. Hiranandani is a bit more troubling since it is excessively used and from his Wikipedia article, assuming it is correct, he was a participant. Even so I think some use is acceptable for an Indian perspective on non-controversial points. Any statements on contestable issues should not be in Wikivoice, i.e. it should be expressed as "According to Hiranandani..." The article already does this in the first paragraph of the attack section. Zawed (talk) 09:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not really seeing this. Most of the sources are to Gulab Mohanlal Hiranandani who is the Indian Navies official historian. Not seeing a reason not to use him, especially for non controversial information as is done. Karim is used once, there is no indication that he was involved and again the info is non-controversial. Aircorn (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Global Security is not really a good source. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:09, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.