Wikipedia:Peer review/Rambhadracharya/archive1

Rambhadracharya edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this article has been recently listed as a good article, and I will like a peer review so that we can meet the Featured article criteria. I will like to have comments on how this article can be improved to get the FA status.

Thanks, :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^Talk ^Email 07:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redtigerxyz's review

I miss a section on his literary style, similar to William_Shakespeare#Style
Works needs to be converted from list to prose format. Instead of this long list of poems, concentrate on his main works. The "Sanskrit commentaries on Prasthanatrayi" prose para is a good example how the list can be converted to prose. Something similar Poems and Plays in Shakespeare article
The WP:LEAD is a summary and ideally no new facts should introduced in the lead. Also, if a fact is cited elsewhere in the article. It does not need a reference in the lead. For example, "is the editor of a critical edition of the Ramcharitmanas" or "has held this title since 1988" does not need a reference here. "His Katha programmes are held regularly in different cities in India and other countries, and are telecast on television channels like Sanskar TV and Sanatan TV" is new fact, which is needs to be also stated and elaborated in the article mainspace "Post of Jagadguru Ramanandacharya". For example which countries did he perform katha programmes and names of television channels.
References: Questionable Reliability
Neutrality of "Critical edition of Ramcharitmanas" section:
- Sentences like "who had done more than four thousand recitations of the entire Ramcharitmanas since childhood until 2006" try to push POV that Ramcharitmanas
- "produced a critical edition of the Ramcharitmanas after studying fifty different editions during eight years of research" and " part from the original text, for which Rambhadracharya has relied extensively on older manuscripts" is written as facts, while the ref TOI [1] clearly states that Rambhadracharya says that he did so, while defending his creation.
- "there are differences in spelling, grammar, and prosodic conventions between this edition and contemporary editions of the Ramcharitmanas as follows" promotes that his disciples' claims that "the alterations mainly relate to punctuation marks, matras and spellings" (TOI), but fails to state from the TOI ref [2] that he might have deleted verses from Ramcharitmanas. Also note that differences is referenced to Rambhadracharya's book itself, which is not a neutral party.
Some awards like 2001. Maharshi Badryan Puruskar. do not have references. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]