Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tripura/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was not promoted by GrahamColm 20:02, 16 January 2013 [1].
Tripura (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): Dwaipayan (talk) 07:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured article because following a peer review and successful GA nomination, the article appears ready for FAC. This is a small state nestled in the northeastern corner of India. Geographically marginalized, it has notable biodiversity and is making gradual progress in human development and economy which lacks any large scale industry. Many topics on the state have no wikipedia articles, so you will find a number of red links. I believe those redlinks deserve individual articles, and so kept the red links on. Hope you enjoy the article. Regards. Dwaipayan (talk) 07:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- To be honest, the prose style of the lead paragraphs is not of sufficient quality to meet the requirements of Good Article, never mind Featured Article. It really needs tweaking by somebody who is a native English speaker. This is a shame, as the rest of the article is well written from what I can see. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:05, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Some attention is also required to the positioning of images in the text (which should have been picked up at the Good Article review). Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images advises that you should "avoid placing images on the left at the start of any section or subsection, because it makes it harder for readers to find the beginning of the text. Images on the left are best placed somewhere after the first paragraph." It also advises that you should "avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other, and between an image and an infobox or similar."
- It may also be an idea to improve the image captions, which in may case appear more like "alt text" than "image captions". Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Captions states that the caption should "draw the reader into the article". It warns that "Different people read articles different ways. Some people start at the top and read each word until the end. Others read the first paragraph and scan through for other interesting information, looking especially at pictures and captions. For those readers, even if the information is adjacent in the text, they will not find it unless it is in the caption—but do not tell the whole story in the caption—use the caption to make the reader curious about the subject." It continues "While a short caption is often appropriate, if it might be seen as trivial ("People playing Monopoly"), consider extending it so that it adds value to the image and is related more logically to the surrounding text ("A product of the Great Depression, Monopoly continues to be played today.")." Skinsmoke (talk) 17:38, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply to Skinsmoke Hi, thanks for the initial review. I am going to correct the positioning of the image/tables now. Actually, some images were left-aligned after the GA review, because some of them were overflowing to the succeeding section/subsection. Are you aware of any MoS guideline that warns against such overflowing? If not, we have no problem. If yes, we my have to do away with one or more images.
- Regarding the prose, first of all, thanks that you told this. I was unsure of the quality, but the peer review etc did not raise strong doubt. In any case, FAC is for this purpose, that is improvement. Let's wait if someone can help with at least the lead. If you feel ok, you can go ahead and do improvement in the lead paragraph, or suggest ways to improvement. Prose has always been a major problem for articles related to India, and this case, unfortunately, is also no exception.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:57, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've replied to the points you made on my Talk page (not copied here as they don't directly relate to the review), where I've also offered my help if you feel you need it. Let me make it clear, this was not an "initial review" as such, just comments on the submission which hopefully are in time to prevent problems when a reviewer picks it up. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your help. Looking forward to your reply in your talk page.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm wondering whether the discussion (which has become rather involved) at my Talk page should be moved here. And whether we should ask the reviewer to put things on hold for a few days, while we sort things out and do a copy edit (no point reviewing the same stuff twice). Perhaps Nikkimaria (the reviewer) has a preference. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a very long discussion, so perhaps just a link to it rather than moving the whole thing here? Or maybe put it on the review talk page? Either way, if it's going to take a few days to sort out the issues being discussed, it might be better to withdraw this nomination for now and bring it back in two weeks with everything done - the delegates generally don't like reviews to be on hold while they're still listed here. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm wondering whether the discussion (which has become rather involved) at my Talk page should be moved here. And whether we should ask the reviewer to put things on hold for a few days, while we sort things out and do a copy edit (no point reviewing the same stuff twice). Perhaps Nikkimaria (the reviewer) has a preference. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for your help. Looking forward to your reply in your talk page.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've replied to the points you made on my Talk page (not copied here as they don't directly relate to the review), where I've also offered my help if you feel you need it. Let me make it clear, this was not an "initial review" as such, just comments on the submission which hopefully are in time to prevent problems when a reviewer picks it up. Skinsmoke (talk) 18:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Image review
- Captions generally need some improvement
- Done. Skinsmoke (talk) 12:08, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Flag_of_India.svg needs to clarify whether the image is also free to use in the US
- Added {{PD-ineligible}} to this image, following the example of File:Flag of the United States.svg. Please tell if this is acceptable.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Since engravings are not covered by freedom of panorama in India, File:Unakoti_group_of_bas-relief_sculptures,Tripura,India.jpg should probably include a licensing tag for the bas-relief - likely {{PD-old-100}}
- Added the suggested license.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Tripura_map.png: on what map or data source(s) was this image based?
- Clarified the sources, including general India map sources and map-specific source.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Seal_of_Tripura.svg: source link returns 404 error, image needs explicit tag for copyright status in US.
- Could not find the source, or determine appropriate US license. So,have hidden the image from the article for now.--Dwaipayan (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria (talk) 03:09, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw Deegates, I am the nominator of this FAC and major contributor to the article. Following the suggestions of Nikkimaria and Skinsmoke, I request you to please close/archive this nomination. We plan to re-submit this at a later date after copyedit and addressing other issues. Thanks for the help. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 20:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.