 | Jatayu Earth's Center Nature Park was nominated as a Sports and recreation good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 3, 2016). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| GA toolbox |
|---|
|
|
| Reviewing |
|
|
Reviewer: Bharatiya29 (talk · contribs) 08:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
| 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. |
|
|
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. |
|
| 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). |
Sourcing doesn't seems to be an issue. |
|
|
2c. it contains no original research. | |
|
|
2d. it contains no copyright violationsorplagiarism. | The article seems to have cases of close paraphrasing. Refer to Copyvio detector. |
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
|
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. |
Sorry to say but the article fails to give detailed coverage of the topic. Some of the facts which need to be mentioned are
|
|
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). |
A mythological description of Jatayu is well under scope given the religious nature of the park. |
|
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. |
No bias whatsoever. |
|
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. |
No ongoing edit-wars. |
| 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. | |
|
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
|
|
7. Overall assessment. |
The main problem here is that the article does not give certain required details about the park. I read the sources and all of them seems to have almost the same facts. I would advice you to wait till the park gets open and receives coverage in other Indian and overseas newspapers or websites. Once the article has some more content and touches upon all major aspects of the park, feel free to renominate. Thanks! Bharatiya29 09:49, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply] |
