Wikipedia:Peer review/Mangalorean Catholics/archive1

Mangalorean Catholics

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this article may contain errors

Thanks, Kensplanet (talk) 15:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments:

• Avoid POV language unless it is in a direct quote, example from the lead: Astonishingly half of them don't even reside in Mangalore, but still are extravagantly bonded to Mangalore culturally as well as traditionally. Both "Astonishingly" and "extravagantly" seem very POV here - see WP:NPOV. Also many places would not consider the 15th century to be "very recent" - why not just say their history dates to the 15th century and leave it at that. There are many other examples of this kind of language throughout the article that need to be cleaned up.
• The lead should be a summary of the entire article - my rule of thumb is that if there is a section on a topic, it should be mentioned in the lead. Also all items in the lead should also be in the article - see WP:LEAD
• Origins section-
  • Hard to see how a Catholic group from the 15th century AD traces its origins to 1000 BC - perhaps start by explaining Konkani and trace its roots to 1000 BC, then bring in other history leading up to 15th century and on to the present.
  • There is no real connection made between the first and second paragraphs in this section - the second seems to be the one with the relevant information (actually about Mangalorean Catholics), but it is completely unsourced.
• History section - hard to see how this differes from Origins section. I have never seen a "This section is based on..." banner - please cite in the normal way with <ref> tags and give page numbers in the book. I also think the history section could be broken up into subsections (perhaps Origins could be merged as the first subsection).
• Need references for all information - see example in Origins above or Names.
  • Need to make sure the refs cited meet WP:RS - one example I noticed was at least one cite to YouTube, which is not a reliable source.
  • Many of the references seem to be from Mangalorean Catholic groups' websites - third party sources are preferred and in some cases required.
  • I have never seen Notes and Bibliography as tables - please put them into regular formats (see {{cite book}} for ezample).

Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Kensplanet

• Avoid POV language unless it is in a direct quote, example from the lead: Astonishingly half of them don't even reside in Mangalore, but still are extravagantly bonded to Mangalore culturally as well as traditionally. Both "Astonishingly" and "extravagantly" seem very POV here - see WP:NPOV.
• Done. The sentence Astonishingly half of them don't even reside in Mangalore, but still are extravagantly bonded to Mangalore culturally as well as traditionally. has been deleted.
• Also many places would not consider the 15th century to be "very recent" - why not just say their history dates to the 15th century and leave it at that.
• Done.
  
• Old sentence: The history and existence of Mangalorean Catholics in Mangalore is very recent, just dating back to the 15th century.
• New sentence: The history and existence of Mangalorean Catholics in Mangalore dates back to the 15th century.
• There are many other examples of this kind of language throughout the article that need to be cleaned up.
• Comment. I'll clean that up.
• The lead should be a summary of the entire article - my rule of thumb is that if there is a section on a topic, it should be mentioned in the lead. Also all items in the lead should also be in the article - see WP:LEAD
• Comment. I have taken a sentence from each and every section.

*Origins section-

• • Hard to see how a Catholic group from the 15th century AD traces its origins to 1000 BC - perhaps start by explaining Konkani and trace its roots to 1000 BC, then bring in other history leading up to 15th century and on to the present.
  • There is no real connection made between the first and second paragraphs in this section - the second seems to be the one with the relevant information (actually about Mangalorean Catholics), but it is completely unsourced.
• History section - hard to see how this differes from Origins section. I have never seen a "This section is based on..." banner - please cite in the normal way with <ref> tags and give page numbers in the book. I also think the history section could be broken up into subsections (perhaps Origins could be merged as the first subsection).
• Comment. This will require some work and i am working on it.
• Need references for all information - see example in Origins above or Names.
• Comment. I'll provide more references from the Web.
  • Need to make sure the refs cited meet WP:RS - one example I noticed was at least one cite to YouTube, which is not a reliable source.
• Done. Youtube references have been deleted. Hereafter, only reliable sources will be added.
  • Many of the references seem to be from Mangalorean Catholic groups' websites - third party sources are preferred and in some cases required.
• Comment. As you have rightly said, third party sources are required.
  • I have never seen Notes and Bibliography as tables - please put them into regular formats (see {{cite book}} for ezample).
• Done. It is now in the normal standard format.