Talk:Liaquat Ali Khan
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's articles related to the Pakistan. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ. |
 |
Liaquat Ali Khan has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 |
Liaquat Ali Khan is a former good article candidate. There are suggestions below for which areas need improvement to satisfy the good article criteria. Once the objections are addressed, the article can be renominated as a good article. If you disagree with the objections, you can seek a review.
Date of review: November 17, 2006 |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
Hello
- Yes?—64.169.86.195 06:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Major overhaul of the article
I have made a major overhaul in the article adding a lot more amount of information. Similarly, I have cited around 9 sources, none of which were present beforehand. The article has also been wikified and numerous pictures have also been added. I have made every effort to present a non-biased and neutral point of view however, if anyone believes that I have been biased in areas, its wikipedia, you are free to correct it.
What I would also like is to diversify the sources which has been cited.(Gambit pk 15:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC))
[edit] This article looks good
But it needs imrpovement it doesn't mention a legacy or any criticisms, it is properly referenced and has good pictures ..I am in two minds about GA status..will get back to it. --Zak 19:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism and Legacy
I have added the "Criticism and legacy" section to the article. Since it might be the most controversial part of the entire article, I have tried to remain as objective as possible and have even written a answer presented to these criticism by Shahid M Amin, who served in the Pakistan foreign service and was a ambassador to various countries, in his book "Pakistan's foreign policy". However I dont feel that answers to criticism should be a part of this section since the section should only focus upon the criticism. Thus I would just like suggestion if the Shahid M Amin part should continue to remain present.
On another note, I believe that I have added sufficient(5 in number) credible references which should be enough. The only thing I see as a deffiency is a picture for this section. I believe a picture of the postage stamps which has his face printed should be a good option.(Gambit pk 11:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC))
[edit] GA nom
This is a good article, however, there are some issues that force to put it on hold for GA.
First and foremost, it needs a thorough copy-editing. There are garmmar mistakes, as well as points that could be rephrased better, IMHO.
Second, some points seem to verge on POV. For instance, you say in the lead-in he was "an obvious choice for prime minister". However, I dont why exactly he was an obvious choice, as opposed to some other politician. Was he an obvious choice according to some authority on the matter, or is this just your POV?
Third, while you do have in-line citations, I think the article could do with a few more. There are whole paragraphs without an in-line citation (e.g. the first para in "Political Career").
Again, like I said, a good article, but needs some fine-tuning yet. Druworos 22:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- The tone is too hagiographic. In the Wikipedia:Peer_review#Liaquat_Ali_Khan, I reviewed one paragraph and found three places where it disagrees with the cited source, but there seems to be no attempt made to address it. Tintin (talk) 01:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Failed GA
Article has been on hold for over a week, and the concerns given have not been addressed. This article has been failed. (I assume that, as above, this is a good article, but not a Good Article) Homestarmy 20:10, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
