Wikipedia:Peer review/Bodh Gaya bombings/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because.I want to improve its quality to GA status.
Thanks, Bhooshan NPY (talk) 18:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hello, with the exception of a few copy-edits (e.g. quotations marks that are not closed, capitalised 'police') this article is quite readable. There are some sentences (for example the bomb blasts' descriptions) that can be found elsewhere on the internet, so it would be good to know if they have been copied from here or from other websites. This article is otherwise quite well-cited, and there are no problems with images. I would encourage you to nominate for GA and deal with any small issues that arise in the context of the nomination. Kind regards, LT910001 (talk) 12:04, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
- Dear @LT910001:, Your feedback is very much helpful. I have edited the changes suggested by you. Can you please let me know if I have missed anything? Many thanks.----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 10:06, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
- Dear @LT910001:, Do you have any comments now? Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 09:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hello! I have no further comments other than recommending you nominate this for good article status (WP:GA?). To do this, you can follow the instructions here (WP:GAN/I). Any problems with the article can be worked out during the thorough GA process. I wish you all the best! LT910001 (talk) 09:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- Dear @LT910001:, Many thanks for your comments.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 11:15, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hello! I have no further comments other than recommending you nominate this for good article status (WP:GA?). To do this, you can follow the instructions here (WP:GAN/I). Any problems with the article can be worked out during the thorough GA process. I wish you all the best! LT910001 (talk) 09:24, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- Dear @LT910001:, Do you have any comments now? Many thanks.-----Bhooshan NPY (talk) 09:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- The article does not qualify for a GA class review, a lot of work needs to be put for it to be considered as a GA. The citations are up-to-date and I haven't found any deadlinks so far. But the article is not broad in its coverage and some sections does not present a NPOV. Please go through Wikipedia:How to write a great article before you nominate it for a GA. 2pennygoat (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2013 (UTC)