Talk:Sri Aurobindo/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 15:47, 30 December 2012 (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.	Believe copyright is ok, hard to be sure as many sites use WP's text. Some issues remain (tagged). I've copy-edited the new text but the rapid editing risks causing further imbalance, as well as disrupting the style of text (and of references, which had been very tidy - not a GA issue, but the article isn't looking its best with references in so many recent styles).
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead ok; layout ok; weasel ok; fiction n/a; list probably acceptable, though "Followers" could with benefit be rewritten as text (and it needs refs). Done. External links far too numerous, and appearing POV - either incorporate as refs or remove, one link to ashram should suffice. Done.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Reference to Ken Wilber's works on Aurobindo are oblique rather than actual direct citations. This needs to be fixed. Influences section is not adequately cited. Answer: updated please have a look. This has fixed the immediate problem, but the coverage of Wilber and other critics remains very thin, not near GA status in this respect.
	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).	There are uncited sections, eg Involution, Evolution, Brahman. Since these are questions of spiritual/religious belief they are open to challenge and must be cited. Answer : Have completely re-written and in summary way from the autobiographical source of Sri Aurobindo. Shrikanthv (talk) 21:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC) Done.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Broadly ok.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Seems acceptably broad, covering expected topic areas. Not sure politics is covered broadly enough, e.g. influence of Vivekananda should be mentioned; indeed, the question of who and what influenced Aurobindo needs some coverage, there is no shortage of sources. Poetry is barely mentioned either. The whole topic of criticism of and reactions to Aurobindo, favourable or otherwise, is not treated - this applies to his politics, poetry and philosophy. Have added info , Vivekananda influence was very brief and have mentioned this regarding politics , he was influenced by French , Italian , American struggle over England Shrikanthv (talk) 15:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC) The direct influence perhaps, but the whole question of the cultural, political and philosophical influences remains almost wholly uncovered in the article, and this is a critical question for GA status.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Focus is ok. Each area is concisely summarized.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	The Influence section is too brief for a major figure like Aurobindo, and dissenting opinions (or interpretations, like Wilber's) need fuller exploration and citation. This remains a major issue for GA status; the article is now referenced, making it clear that most of it is either from Aurobindo's own writings or from his ashram, risking a breach of WP:NPOV. This must be balanced by a suitable coverage of other points of view, especially but not limited to the Influence section. It would be advisable to introduce a "Critiques" section also to give adequate coverage of other authors' views of Aurobindo and his philosophy. Answer : updated with citation. The progress that has been made makes it clear that much work remains to be done to achieve proper balance, rather than having a view "from inside". This will involve substantial knowledge of the literature about Aurobindo.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	no sign of it.
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.	Surat Congress image lacks author, copyright tag Answer : Have corrected the image details with new url source , (please note that picture is more than 100 years old and the author cannot be identified.) Done.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	ok.
	7. Overall assessment.	The hard work of the week on hold has fixed the immediate referencing issues, but has exposed the structural weakness of the article in describing mainly the Aurobindo story from within, with only marginal coverage of the influences on his politics and philosophy, and equally thin treatment of his position vis-a-vis the critics, favourable or otherwise, of politics, philosophy and poetry. Since it does not appear likely that this could be rectified if the article is held for another week or two, it will be best if it is worked on quietly by the community for a while, and brought back here perhaps in six months or so when ready.

I would not even bother to review it. The article is largely unsourced and it is impossible to fix it in a month or two. It is full of tags and in need of more. Thus, it is eligible for a quick fail. — Yash ^[talk] 14:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

If other people feel the same, we can do that. For now, I'm minded to wait a week and see if it's making realistic progress. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)