Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Peer review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut: WP:INPR

IMPORTANT: If you wish to make a peer-review request, please follow the instructions here.

The peer review department of the India WikiProject conducts peer review of articles on request. The primary objective is to encourage better articles by having contributors who may not have worked on articles to examine them and provide ideas for further improvement.

The peer review process is highly flexible and can deal with articles of any quality; however, requesting reviews on very short articles may not be productive, as there is little for readers to comment on.

All reviews are conducted by fellow editors—usually members of the India WikiProject. While there is a general intent to expand this process to allow for review by subject experts, the preparations for this are not yet complete.

Contents 1 Instructions 1.1 Requesting a review 1.2 Responding to a request 1.3 Archiving 1.4 Peer-review Team 2 Requests 2.1 Valparai 2.2 Faruqi dynasty 2.3 S. Kumarasamy 2.4 Hemu 2.5 ICFAI 2.6 Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering 2.6.1 RegentsPark 2.6.1.1 Lead 2.6.1.2 History 2.6.1.3 Milestones 2.6.1.4 Library 2.6.1.5 The Forum 2.6.1.6 Other stuff 2.6.1.7 Hostel 2.6.1.8 Scholarships and Honors 2.7 National Institute of Technology, Srinagar 2.7.1 User:RegentsPark 2.7.1.1 Lead 2.7.1.2 History 2.7.1.3 The Institute 2.7.1.4 Facilities 2.7.1.5 Missing 2.8 Rajkot 2.8.1 Kensplanet 2.8.1.1 Lead In 2.8.1.2 History 2.8.1.3 Geography and climate 2.8.1.4 Demographics 2.8.1.5 Culture 2.8.1.6 Economy 2.8.1.7 Law and government 2.8.1.8 Education 2.8.1.9 Transport 2.8.1.10 Sister cities 2.8.1.11 See also 2.8.1.12 References 2.8.1.13 Further reading 2.8.1.14 External links 2.8.1.15 Other 2.9 Uttar Pradesh Technical University 2.10 Kerala High Court 2.11 The Great Indian Novel 2.12 Hindu-German Conspiracy 2.13 Anand (2004 film) 2.14 Historical definitions of races in India 2.15 Dravidian people 2.16 North South Foundation 2.17 Tata Elxsi 2.18 Krishna Institute of Engineering and Technology 2.19 Little India (magazine) 2.19.1 Mspraveen 2.19.2 RegentsPark 2.20 Combined Defence Services Examination 2.21 Union Public Service Commission 2.22 Chikkamagaluru District 2.22.1 Kensplanet

[edit] Instructions

[edit] Requesting a review

If you wish to request for a review, you need to follow the following steps.

1. Go to the article you wish to nominate for peer review, then click on the "talk page" tab, then click on the "edit this page" tab.
2. At the top, you should find the {{WP India}} project banner which looks something like {{WP India|class=|importance=}}
3. Add peer-review=yes to the banner so that it looks like code>{{WP India|class=|importance=|peer-review=yes}} (see the project banner instructions if you need more details)
4. Click on the "save page" button.
5. Click on the "request has been made" link that appears in the WikiProject India banner now. This will open a (new) page to discuss the review of your article.
6. Place === [[Name of nominated article]] === at the top. Below it, write your reason for nominating the article and sign your request by using four tildes (~~~~).
7. Go to the list of requests, and click the "edit" tab. Add {{Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Peer review/Name of nominated article}} at the top of the requests, and click on the "save page" button.
8. Check regularly to see if your article has been peer-reviewed, so that you can see the comments given, and be sure to thank any editors who have spent their time and effort peer-reviewing your article. Make any of the suggested changes in your article.
9. If you have received no response to your peer-review request for quite some time, feel free to contact one of the bolded members of the WikiProject India peer-review department, listed at the bottom of these instructions.

[edit] Responding to a request

Everyone is encouraged to comment on any request listed here. To comment on an article, please add a new section (using ==== [[User:Your name|Your name]] ====) for your comments, in order to keep multiple responses legible. Make sure to sign your requests too by using four tildes (~~~~).

[edit] Archiving

Reviews should be archived after they have been inactive for some time, but must have had at least 2 different peer-reviews (by at least 2 different editors) made on it. Reviews can also be archived if the article has been successful as a featured article candidate.

To archive:

1. Replace peer-review=yes with old-peer-review=yes in the {{WP India}} project banner template at the top of the article's talk page
2. Move {{Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Peer review/Name of nominated article}} from this page to the current archive page.

Peer-reviews that have been conducted prior to this year can be found at the 2006 WikiProject India peer-review and 2007 WikiProject India peer-review pages.

[edit] Peer-review Team

If you would like to join the peer-review team, please add your name below. Members of the team who are bolded (below) are currently active members of the peer review team and are likely to peer-review articles, and answer any queries you have in relation to their peer review. Particularly if you have received no response for some time on your peer-review request, please feel free to contact the members that are bolded and listed here.

1. Anupam (talk · contribs)
2. Bakasuprman (talk · contribs)
3. DaGizza (talk · contribs)
4. Ganeshk (talk · contribs)
5. Kanchanamala (talk · contribs)
6. Kensplanet (talk · contribs) - active peer-reviewer
7. Ncmvocalist (talk · contribs) - maintenance of this peer-review department
8. RegentsPark (talk · contribs) - active peer-reviewer
9. Salilb (talk · contribs)
10. Tinucherian (talk · contribs)

[edit] Requests

[edit] Valparai

Blocks of text on "History of Valparai" alongwith some texts were removed in accordance with Neutrality, Verifiability and NOR issues. Also, more reliable sources, such as newspaper articles and information form government departments have been added with references.Dilli2040 (talk) 04:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Faruqi dynasty

I believe the peer review will help in improving the style, reference and presentation of the article.Joy1963 (talk) 13:35, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] S. Kumarasamy

I honestly beleive that a good Peer review will furthermore improve this article. --Logic riches (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hemu

This article has a lot of POV issues. Can anyone check them? Salilb (talk) 12:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ICFAI

Hi, I have re-written the article and tried to cover the different entities under the ICFAI umbrella. Also tried to cover the grievances aired by a lot of students against Icfai, specifically the regarding DLP. Would like to get a comment on the same. Thanks. Shovon (talk) 10:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering

I have nominated this article for a peer review,to find improvement areas before it undergoes quality assessment. - Amog |^Talk 14:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RegentsPark

To be perfectly honest, the article reads like an official document (excluding, of course, the controversies section). Typically, you want a well-written piece that minimizes information that most readers will not be interested in. For example, consider the 'History' section which can be compressed into a couple of sentences. Someone needs to go through the article and add whitespaces after commas.

[edit] Lead

Looks ok. Perhaps you can add a line relating to the controversies here to make it interesting. Perhaps not.

[edit] History

Too much detail. And, what is a grihapravesam? I assume that not much has happened in the way of exciting stuff (good news for a college!) so there is not much to say here but surely the college must have grown in number of students, degrees granted, areas of instruction, etc. Perhaps that should be featured in the history section.

[edit] Milestones

These aren't really milestones. The first para (SIPC stuff) should go into a section on 'Management and administration' since apparently SIPC owns the college. In that section, you should include any information about a board of directors, how they are selected, etc. You also need to include information about finances (is the college self-sufficient, does tuition cover all expenses, if not, where does the rest of the money come from? Is there an endowment?)

The second part of the milestones section should go into a section on alumni.

The BT in info tech should go into 'History'.

[edit] Library

Probably should go into a section labeled Facilities.

[edit] The Forum

Should probably go into a section on Academics. That's where you want to put areas of instruction (departments), special academic programs, etc.

[edit] Other stuff

You need to talk about admissions in a way that makes the controversy described in the article clear. It is not clear to someone like me (who knows nothing about admission to Chennai colleges) what the implications of the controversy are and how the controversy links to the way in which students are admitted.

[edit] Hostel

I suggest rewriting this under the title 'Student life' and including information about clubs, activities (festivals?) etc. Think about what someone from a rival college would like to know about student life at SVC.

[edit] Scholarships and Honors

Should go in academics as a sub-section. Honors, as a section, typically relates to honors that the college and its members receive from outside. --RegentsPark (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] National Institute of Technology, Srinagar

I have nominated this article for peer review because I feel that this article can be further improved in terms of its quality as well as its quantity. Any piece of advice would of great help.
Rohit Reddy™ (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:RegentsPark

Needs some copyediting. Not a whole lot but I see quite a few articles before proper nouns.

[edit] Lead

Lead is too short. I'm not sure what you can say about it - perhaps something about how it compares with its peers (if any) in the region.

[edit] History

I guess its ok. A bit bland though. Surely something interesting has happened in the course of its 48 year history? Srinagar is a place where interesting things happen.

[edit] The Institute

This section is weak. Lots of peacock words. Example: "The Institute has won recognition as an important National Institute in the field of Technical Education and has been playing a pivotal role in the development of the Kashmir region." If it has won recognition, the form of that recognition should be stated (an award or awards?). If it has played a pivotal role, then the role should be described. To be honest, I don't think you need this section. Some of the material can go into the lead, some into history, and some into facilities.

[edit] Facilities

Watch out for words like excellent and well equipped with no descriptions! My opinion, there is too much information. Not much point in listing indoor games, for example. You can better use the space by adding things that are missing (see below).

[edit] Missing

There is nothing about academics and courses; nothing about research at the institute; nothing about administration and finances; nothing about student life at the institute; nothing about alumni; and nothing about the elephant in the room (how have the troubles in Kashmir affected the institute). --RegentsPark (talk) 03:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rajkot

I have nominated Rajkot Article for peer review because I feel that I have made significant changes in this article and I like to collect review to improve quality of this article. Ultimate goal is to nominate this article in FA category. Jadia Gaurang Pravinbhai 07:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kensplanet

[edit] Lead In

• Rajkot is the 28th urban agglomeration in India, with a population more than 1.43 million as on 2008
  

I recommend removing this sentence. If Rajkot is the 2nd urban agglomeration in India, then do mention it. Morever, "Rajkot is the 28th urban agglomeration in India" is meaningless

• The Lead In is too. short. It doesn't summarize the key aspects of the city. Think of some key aspects and rewrite this section.
• I suggest you to refer the Mumbai Lead In. Although the city has a lot of things to be proud of, but only the key points are mentioned.

[edit] History

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Indian cities#History clearly states Do not use subheadings. There is no hard and fast rule that you must follow it. But the History section has too. many sub-sections and there is hardly any data in it. Just a meagre 1 or 2 sentences. Please do not use sub-headings. Only a full-fledged section is enough.
• I suggest you to refer the Bangalore Article for this section.

[edit] Geography and climate

• This section looks fine. Appropriate formatting willl do. The Climate sub-section is not at all Wiki-linked. Please wiki-link it. Try to wiki-link some terms.
• Refer the Chennai article for Geography and climate.

[edit] Demographics

• This will require some work. I am sure you can collect more data such as density, migrants, slum population, ethnic groups, religions from the Net.
• Delhi has a very good Demographic section written. Please refer it.

[edit] Culture

• I am sorry but Culture is a total mess. It doesn't have even a single Image. Culture section has to be the best in each and every city article. You will have to forge it somehow.
• Please support the section with Images
• Mumbai has a beautiful section on Culture. I advise you to refer there.

[edit] Economy

• This section really needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling. You are never supposed to list Industries. You have to maintain a paragraph. Data within this section looks fine. But proper formatting and grammar is required.
• Support the section with Images.
• I suggest you to refer the Kochi Article for this section.

[edit] Law and government

• This section is not fine. Try to keep the table at the extreme left.
• Citizens can now get all their complaints registered with the Rajkot Municipal Corporation by dialling a single number with an assurance that the problem would be addressed within 72 hours--->>> Is this some sort of an advetisement. Please remove this.
• In recent time, The most disturbing crime trend, however, has been an increasing number of incidents of parents murdering their children. Local government and state government are tediously working to reduce crime rate in city.-->>>Please use references. I really don't beleive this.
• Support the section with Images.
• Mumbai has a very well written Civic administration section which has details on courts, police, fire brigades, etc.

[edit] Education

• Details are insufficient.
• Where is the language or medium of Instruction details, CBSE or Gujarat or ICSE Board details, government or private run college details.
• Support the section with Images.
• Refer Chennai for this section.

[edit] Transport

• Details are again insufficient.
• Come on, it is very easy to chuck out details from the NET regarding Transport.
• Support the section with Images
• Delhi has a very good Transport section. Maybe you can improve your article by referring that article.

[edit] Sister cities

• Fine
• If Rajkot has only 1 Sister city, the I recommend renaming Sister cities to Sister city.

[edit] See also

• Please remove Rajkot's Reference Portal from this section. It should be meant only for WIKI-LINKS. Merge it with External Links.
• Apart from the Portal, this section looks very neat. Good Work

[edit] References

• Fine for now. As you go on improving the Article, References will increase. Avoid any mistakes here. Currently, I can see Media:http://rajkotcityguide.com which is not referenced properly.

[edit] Further reading

• Very Good section. No improvements. Perfect. Keep it up. Keep on updating with more books. That's it.

[edit] External links

• Avoid so many Links.
• Keep only the key vital links which give details on the city as a whole.
• Do not include links which just focuses on Industries, but doesn't focus on other aspects of the city like History, Geography etc...

[edit] Other

• Other items like Categories, Templates are fine.

Hope this review helps the Article.
Any doubts, please contact me. May this Article become a FA soon---->>>>>Kensplanet (talk) 14:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Uttar Pradesh Technical University

This article now has more matter than a stub-class article. deltaG (talk) 12:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kerala High Court

For the greater benefit of all Wikipedians, I feel that this article has undergo a peer review... Adv. Ranjith Xavier (talk) 09:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC) Attokaran

[edit] The Great Indian Novel

This is an important novel in historical, satirical, literary, and political terms. The article lay dormant for a long time and I've tried to give it some meat. However, it is a very complex and at times subtle satire. Editors should in particular pay attention to allusions and connections that have been missed. The tables of character, place, event connections should also be worked on. Acsenray (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hindu-German Conspiracy

I think this a pretty comprehensive article based on the most reliable and comprehensive sources I could think of. I need feedback on wether the article is NPOV, NOR and general quality, since I am thinking of listing this for FA soon.Rueben lys (talk) 17:02, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anand (2004 film)

This article (currently B-class) has been substantially developed over the past couple of weeks by me. I'd love critique from my fellow-editors so that I can bring it further up on quality. Regards, Mspraveen 08:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Historical definitions of races in India

Various fringe views are being aired, and more input/review from Indian editors would be helpful. --JWB 08:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dravidian people

Various fringe views are being aired, and more input/review from Indian editors would be helpful. --JWB 08:17, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] North South Foundation

I think this should be nominated because we as a community have worked hard to make it a nice article from a 2-4 sentence stub. Whaatt 19:30, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tata Elxsi

It would be very helpful if someone peer-review this article. Kiran Nair 12:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Krishna Institute of Engineering and Technology

The article is now B class. Please help improve its level --deltaG 20:13, 08 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Little India (magazine)

I think that a good peer review will help us improve this article a good bit. Arundhati lejeune 08:53, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mspraveen

Now that it is of a stub class, it means that it is a real article. However, it would need a lot of work to be done on the breadth of the article. Good checklists to use for the article are WP:WIAFA and WP:WIAGA. A key to remember is that the articles on Wikipedia (it being an encyclopedia) should assume a neutral point of view and ample referencing is encouraged for the veracity of the article.

The article, in specific, needs a proper structure like the lead section, its origins (history), the style of the magazine (features right from the editorial to the choice of articles within it), any awards that it won, any special notable features of the magazine, any special/notable columnists and so on. Maybe, an article that classifies as a publication is The Economist.

To further develop your article, you may use the article development guide. Good luck! If you have any further questions, please revert to me on my talk page. —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 06:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RegentsPark

Do note also that, the way the article is currently written, it could easily be deleted for lack of notability (see WP:N). You need to show that the publication is notable and you can do that by fixing your citations. For example, the first sentence needs a Reliable Source to back up the claim of largest circulating publication. Later in the article, there is a reference to www.bpaww.com, the actual page (with access date) should be included as a link in the article. The same applies to the two awards mentioned in the article as well as to the claim in the last sentence (any reasonable source will do for a 'believed' type of statement). --RegentsPark (talk) 21:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Combined Defence Services Examination

i created this page with the intention of providing info to the aspirants who wish get into the armed forces....i would like to know about what the fellow wikipedians think of it.... Gprince007 15:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Union Public Service Commission

i feel that a peer review will help us improve this page and make it more informative...constructive criticisms welcome ... Gprince007 14:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chikkamagaluru District

Adding peer review request from User:Amarrg. -- Ganeshk (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kensplanet

• Please expand the Lead in. I am sure Chikkamagaluru District has more to offer.
• There is a Chickmagalure in the InfoBox section. What is it? I am confused. A foreigner will be totally confused. Please explain.......
• Inadequate data on History.
• Industries should be a sub-section under Economy. I suggest merging the Industries section with Economy.
• Education is totally a mess. Why does the article mention about the institutions in the Technical education section. Best would be a stand-alone Education section. I'll continue-----Kensplanet (talk) 17:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)