Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Talk:Bajirao I

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeBajirao I was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 13, 2020Good article nomineeListed
August 11, 2020Good article reassessmentDelisted
August 30, 2020Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 18, 2018, August 18, 2021, April 28, 2023, and April 28, 2024.
Current status: Former good article nominee

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 23:14, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delisted GA; ineligible

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Mahusha (talk). Self-nominated at 17:11, 17 July 2020 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes

QPQ: No - "NA"
Overall: AGF on hook citation (have verified elsewhere, eg The First Anglo-Maratha War, 1774-1783); promoter to GA status has since been blocked as a sockpuppet, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The GA review was completed by a sockpuppet. SL93 (talk) 02:18, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the article is currently undergoing a GA reassessment, it makes sense to hold off closing this nomination until we see whether the reassessment closes as "delist" or "keep". If the latter, the DYK nomination can continue; if it is delisted, then the nomination should be closed at that time. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article has been delisted as a GA, so it is not eligible for DYK at the present time. Should it eventually be nominated for and listed again as a GA, it will be eligible for DYK at that time. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:18, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Bernard Montgomery, 1st Viscount Montgomery of Alamein (1972). A Concise History of Warfare. London:Collins. p. 132,135.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

GA Reassessment

[edit]
This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Baji Rao I/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

The article was recently accorded GA status by a somewhat prolific sockpuppet who clearly did not understand GA criteria. It is obvious from my recent edits that it fails even on basic issues, such as overlinks, inconsistent spellings, WP:MOSHEAD, WP:MOSDATE, WP:QUOTEFARM and WP:RS. In addition, I think Abbasquadir was correct to tag for lack of focus etc and I note that they, too, have done some cleaning since the article was promoted. I further note the comment of Kingsif here regarding the likelihood of a quick fail if the article were nominated as of today.

Despite my efforts and those of others, there remain significant problems even among the issues I have specifically highlighted above. I note that I had to remove one quotation because it had three cites, all of which had different versions of what Baji Rao supposedly said - that suggests we may need to review every statement against the cited sources. - Sitush (talk) 03:34, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Outcome - clear consensus that the GA assessment by what turned out to be a sock was flawed and the article remains below GA standard. Delisting. - Sitush (talk) 17:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reassessment

[edit]

I think the article needs more citations as there are quite a few "citation needed" tags. Also, the prose style isn't the best but focusing on the citations would probably get the article to a B-class level. PrathuCoder (talk) 00:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bajirao_I&oldid=1221281576"