Talk:Andhra Pradesh

Addressing Peer review feedback

I am starting to address recent peer review feedback from User:Z1720 at Wikipedia:Peer review/Andhra Pradesh/archive2, copied below for tracking. Request others to collaborate, or give feedback on the same.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

History

The History section devotes a lot more space to recent events than it does to older events. I suggest summarising the information more effectively and moving prose to the History of Andhra Pradesh article, which can go into more detail.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Word count for post independence section reduced to 688 from 1056 (-36%). Addressed. Arjunaraoc (talk) 11:00, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Religion

Religion section needs expansion.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Removed the section headings to address the issue, as there is less content on religion demographics. Arjunaraoc (talk) 00:09, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Family Health

The "Family health" section doesn't really talk about family health, with demographic statistics listed instead. I think this should be moved to the general Demographics section.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Removed the section heading to address the issue. Arjunaraoc (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Administrative Divisions

"Revenue divisions" and "Mandals and village panchayats" need expansion. As someone who does not know about India, I do not know why any of this is important.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Merged the text into districts, as these are important administrative divisons in the state. Arjunaraoc (talk) 00:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Services

Expand the two paragraphs of the "Services" section and remove the headings as they are not needed and cause MOS:OVERSECTION "Meanwhile, Jagan Mohan Reddy announced that Visakhapatnam would become the new capital when he addressed a meeting on 31 January 2023, relating to an upcoming investment summit." has a "needs update" tag that should be resolved. In general, be aware of MOS:OVERSECTION. Sections with a short paragraph should be merged.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Removed the headings for now to avoid MOS:OVERSECTION. The question regarding needs update addressed already. Arjunaraoc (talk) 00:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Festivals

"Festivals" should be expanded or merged with another section.--Arjunaraoc (talk) 10:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Expanded with details about Sankranthi and Ugadi. Arjunaraoc (talk) 13:12, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Native name

I think ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ should be added as a native name but there's no space in infobox for this and idk how to do that Helloisgone (talk) 04:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Helloisgone, as per WP:INDICSCRIPT, name in Telugu is not allowed. Arjunaraoc (talk) 09:17, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Andhra Pradesh/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Arjunaraoc (talk · contribs) 13:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Reviewer: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 13:32, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

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.	Prose is largely clear.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	As per MOS:CITELEAD, Lead section shall summarize the same and if it is already referenced, it is redundant and not required. Please do not re-link names that has already been linked before in the article. E.g. River names are linked multiple times There are links to non-existent pages such as Annamayya project Capitalization need to be checked as there are multiple instances where capital letters are used in the middle of the sentence for common names. E.g. Early, River, Salt in the first few paragraphs Sections need re-arranging as per MOS:OVERSECTION. Move culture before economy. Combine Administration and Politics. Not sure why there is a separate section for Science and Technology, it should be part of economy. Tourism shall be part of either economy (it is mentioned in economy as well) or sports and recreation. Religious places can move to religion. Government finances and GDP should be part of economy.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	There are bare citations E.g. Buddhism in the Krishna river valley of Andhra, Tibetan renaissance. Please ensure references are quoted in proper style. Please check if the sources are quoted with the required parameters as access dates are missing for few cases. Maintain uniformity in style as isbn numbers are in different formatting across the article and some sources have 10 digit old isbn nos.
	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).	Lot of work is required on citations. Please ensure that citations are provided for all the sentences. There are multiple instances of no citation being provided or complete citations are missing. E.g. in the culture section, most GI products have no references, literature section has unreferenced lines. Data needs to be updated wherever recent data is available with the year mentioned. Say the sentence "Pandit Nehru Bus Station (PNBS) in Vijayawada is the second-largest bus terminal in Asia" is based on a 2013 source. It is not applicable as of today. "The AP statewide area network (APSWAN) connects 2,164 offices of state administration at 668 locations" does not quote any year or when the data is from.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Please ensure that the citations mention what is conveyed in the prose. E.g. There is no mention of Kalagnanam being written in 16th century in the quotes.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	As per Earwig, no major issues here. Some sections would be better served with additional sources. Say for e.g. Festivals largely rely on a single source and almost follows the source text.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	There are quite a few sections with just a few sentences or does not have adequate coverage. Would be better to cover with some more detailing. E.g. Services, Air transport, sports, health
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Some sections go into unnecessary detailing in some aspects and give undue weight to certain events/persons. Even peer review comments have pointed out the same. Say majority of the post independence events in the history section belong to politics. History shall point generalized points without going to detailing on the politics behind it. Why only 2024 elections is covered in a separate section while there is no mention on any of the previous ones. In the sports section, it simply gives names of few cricket stadia and select sportspeople with a select school being mentioned. It can talk about traditional sports, state sport and other general infrastructure.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.	Most images do not have licensing issues. Some images have restrictions on usage. Please check. E.g. File:Zamin Ryot masthead.jpg
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	There is a lot of image clutter. Almost every section has a gallery of images which are not essential to the content with multiple images being cramped. Please refer to WP:NOTGALLERY and keep only representative images. The images and charts also do not conform to the respective sections and are spilling over to other sections. E.g. Meeseva office image in history, multiple images of rivers, companies, power plants, colleges, temples etc.
	7. Overall assessment.	As per the comments, the article needs quite a bit of working. Say for citations, I have checked sample cases while the entire article might yield more similar issues. Please work on addressing the issues completely. As you have worked on this article extensively and the article has been waiting for a review for a while, I am putting it on hold for the moment. But given the extensive rework required, not sure if you can address the same within the next few days. Let me know your intention on the same. Thanks!