Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Peer review/2006

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please put newer requests at the top.

Satellite Instructional Television Experiment[edit]

I started working on this article just 2 days ago. I've expanded the article and it now covers all aspects of the experiment. I have more material in the form of a UN report and a study conducted by the Planning Commission. So I can add more information if required. Till now I haven't had time to look at the prose. Any comment is welcome. I intend to make this an FA. - Aksi_great (talk) 19:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good start. I don't know anything about the topic, but nothing jumps out to me as being left out. Unless there really isn't much more information available that is important, I think it would have to be expanded to make being a FA possible. But certainly don't fluff it up with unimportant things just to expand it. Other than expanding it in general I can't think of anything really important to offer. You'll have to re-write the lead after expanding anyway, so do that last probably to make sure you properly summarize the article. Maybe a bit more on ending the experiment. If it's just as simple as the experiment was set for a year and then it was over, make that more clear, but perhaps also add a tiny bit to what other demands were on the sattelite. It says the signal was for two dialects were broadcasted, but later says four languages were involved, can you clarify that? Did it broadcast different dialects for each language and how did the viewer choose, etc. - Taxman Talk 17:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the prompt review. I have lots and lots of information about the entire experiment but just don't know how much to put in the article. I'll put some more info as I go through the UN report on the experiment. I'll also look into the languages issue. - Aksi_great (talk) 17:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's the trick really, deciding what all is important out of the information you have, but without looking at the sources I couldn't really tell I guess. You've laid it out fairly well it seems, so maybe just expand everything with a little more detail unless something jumps out as being important to cover. The topic probably doesn't require 80kb of text, this is one I think would be perfectly fine as a FA with 20 or 30kb. - Taxman Talk 22:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can discuss why the project was stopped, and what sort of programming was available. Some specific examples would help. Needs a copyedit too. =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Kerala[edit]

The portal has undergone a good amount of development recently. I welcome suggestions for its further improvement on the path to featured status. I'm particularly bad at my artistic abilities and hence would be grateful if someone could suggest a better colour scheme for the portal too. Also, it is necessary for me to mention that the "selected picture" and "selected articles" on the portal are automatically rotated using in-built code. I'm all ears to the criticism of this system too. Thank you for your time.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 13:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The editors have done a really nice job on Portal:Kerala. Especially, the templates are brilliant. But, did I miss the mention of WikiProject on Kerala. I am sure a project on Kerala exists. Infact, here it is - Wikipedia:WikiProject Kerala. I feel, it would've been better if it were mentioned somewhere, especially below the "Wikipedia in Malayalam" template. Another thing, I feel should be there, is a bit about the history of Kerala in the main section. Some one or two lines may do. Other than that, it's a really nice job. --NRS | T/M\B 13:46, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • ↔Thank you! I've added some more data to the introduction section of the portal. Take and look. A link to the Kerala WikiProject already existed on the portal under the OPEN TASKS box. It was pointing to the Kerala noticeboard, by which the WikiProject used to known as until recently.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 17:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Very cool! Is it really necessary to use multiple boxes though? If it is how about aligning them better... for example make SELECTED PICTURE and NEWS start at the same horizontal line? --hydkat 14:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • ↔We have no option but to use multiple boxes, I'm afraid. Else editing the sections as well as rotating content would become very cumbersome. About the alignment, it can be made possible, but the problem is that it would leave large void spaces in between the boxes if a Selected article with very little text (or too much text) comes up. So I though it best to let the boxes arrange themselves. Maybe I should reduce the distance between the boxes?--thunderboltz(Deepu) 17:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! I see some refreshing changes have been made to the portal recently. Nice job. Guess I can flick some of the ideas for WP:KAR on which I'm working. Sarvagnya 16:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • ↔Thank you! Nice to know people hop into the portal namespace now and then. Feel free to mercilessly rip off any and all the content on the page. Wikipedia is a free world! (And I've abused this freedom quite a bit to get the Kerala portal to its present shape). So tit for tat. :) --thunderboltz(Deepu) 17:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overall it looks good, just a few minor issues.
    • Archives need to be created for Selected article and picture queue.
    • Open tasks need to be expanded. Currently it is empty.
    • The vertical gap between the boxes need to be reduced.
    • One subjective take on the DYK section. Try to reduce the number of DYKs on the Main Page. Not only it becomes too cumbersome to read, infrequent updates (as expected from this topic) would make a larger DYK section look a lot more stale than it is. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 06:01, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the issue with the boxes and DYKs. I'm still working on the archiving issue. This is a slight problem since the articles are chosen automatically through in-built code.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 11:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job. Would do better with a list of important articles covered by the portal. ­ ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 18:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! The articles covered by the portal are given here. This page is linked from Portal:Kerala/Selected articles and Portal:Kerala/Selected pictures.--thunderboltz(Deepu) 11:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences[edit]

Hello everyone, please put forward suggestions to improve the article on NUJS Legaleagle86 07:31, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems to be too long. You might need to work on keeping the information short and crisp, about 60% of the current length should do fine. ­ ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 18:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you srkris for your suggestion, but can more specific changes be pointed out.Legaleagle86 14:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • In my opinion, there are many sentences that need to be re-written from scratch. For example, the philosophy section is all flowery and doesn't contribute to the article in an encyclopedic way. Instead of writing what are the objectives and vision of the institute, write what the institute DID, and back it by reliable sources other than university's own publications. The Vice Chancellor section needs to be scrapped as it is useless. The whole section on faculty needs to be re-written. Instead of writing about individual faculty, write a general discussion on what is the faculty strength, what are the facilities provided to them, etc. — Ambuj Saxena (☎) 10:15, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

B. R. Ambedkar[edit]

Those people who made previous request for peer review didnt take note of review made by me and were absent for a long gap,so I updated article on my own to a substantial amount.Made more balanced ,diluted POVs wherever possible.

I would request one more peer review to bring article to F.A. level

Mahitgar 08:38, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:B._R._Ambedkar/Comments"


I feel it contains too much on anti-caste theme, which overshadows his other aspects. ­ ॐ Kris (☎ talk | contribs) 18:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

needs some more copy editing (i'll try do this). also, ambedkar's seated pic. as a barrister, which is most splendid, should be moved to the top. -- mowglee 05:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

also, ambedkar's disillusionment with his own work and contributions, towards the end of his life, has not been touched. -- mowglee 06:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Government of India[edit]

This is not an article, but I would like to nominate here and want to know how it could be improved to make it featured portal. Portal is well formatted and documented. The portal has selected articles and selected lists on monthly basis. The portal has anniversary section as well. Shyam (T/C) 06:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My comments
  1. The article should be rotated weekly - I think a month is too long.
  2. Selected picture?
  3. One very bad point is that section contains hardly any information on legislation or government schemes. I suggest you accumulate a list of important legislation, even the laws made in British times.
  4. Its important to recognize that politics and history are only so much - the issues of governance are more important. DYKs like "Jinnah House" - how is this connect to GOI?
  5. Also in the "News" - I'd like to see a fine line drawn between political events and government. For example, neither the Shiv Sena nor the MRS are part of the M'rashtra govt. So why is their clash given as news here?
  6. Focus more on institutions like CBI, Election Commission, ministries, the innumerable yojnas like family planning, rural employment, education, Golden Quadrilateral. Also stuff like autonomous councils for Gorkhaland, Bodoland, etc. This is, IMO the real government stuff.
  7. Articles like Human rights in India, Poverty in India etc. - broad discussions of governance (not just political!) issues are also relevant.
  8. IMO, don't make the mistake of including many bio-datas of politicians - this is different from government. Rama's arrow 17:40, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  9. I would definitely want to see more data from state government levels - just to clarify, Indian states are not sovereign like U.S. states. Their governments are a part of GOI. Rama's arrow 17:41, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thiruvananthapuram[edit]

Formal request for a peer review for this article as a way of preparing for featured article.

-- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 12:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Haven't gone through the article in detail, so just a few passing by comments. Try to match the article per the standards mentioned in WP:INCITIES. Specifically, take care of the sections in the article. The sections on city's importance and science and technology may have to go (or merged to appropriate section). Add the city's location using one of the coordinate templates given in the WikiProject page. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 12:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am editing/fixing the article. The section Science and Technology can be either merged with Education or can be removed. I will discuss about that in the talk page. The section city's important can be retained. I am providing enough inline references there. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 16:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • City's location is already added in the article. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 16:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment There is no reference to the sentences related to Vizhinjam. References are needed there. The section city's important can be retained, hence it reflects the the future developments as well. --Samaleks 07:32, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The section Science and Technology is merged with the Education section. -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me...) :-) 13:02, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gulzar[edit]

The article does not contain much information about Gulzar as a writor or director, his writing style, his direction method, or any definitive comparison of his writing with other writers, (e.g. compare him with Galib, or even Javed Akhtar or Anand Bakshi). If filmography is removed, the article may even classify as a stub. Chirag 21:55, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citations[edit]

It does not have any footnotes nor a photograph of Gulzar sumal 06:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is quite clear that this article is still a stub. Chirag, I am not sure if you know how to proceed about the article, why don't you do it first, and come back when you run out of ideas. I hope you understand that this process is about getting ideas for articles, as against getting people work on it. If you want the latter, try Notice board for India-related topics/INCOTW. I am sure there would be many people interested in improving this article. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 17:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_India/Peer_review/2006&oldid=164466001"