Talk:Agra Fort/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Nominator: SilkTork (talk · contribs) 19:13, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Noukayami (talk · contribs) 06:17, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

GA Review

Reviewer: Noukayami^(talk) 09:10, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

I have completed the review of this article. Thank you to the nominator and all editors for the excellent work on this highly detailed and well-sourced page. As the reviewer, I went ahead and made a few minor technical fixes (repairing the broken reference tag for the Panipat citation, correcting the "principle/principal" typo, and cleaning up a few trailing spaces).

Here is the full evaluation against the Good Article criteria:

1. Well-written:

• (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct: Y
• (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: Y

2. Verifiable with no original research:

• (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: Y (Note: Excellent use of archive links to prevent link rot).
• (b) all in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged: Y
• (c) it contains no original research: Y
• (d) it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: Y (Checked via Earwig's Copyvio Detector; no issues found. Text correctly attributes claims to relevant historians).

3. Broad in its coverage:

• (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic: Y (Comprehensive timeline from Lodi and Mughal eras through to modern ASI/UNESCO conservation).
• (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): Y

4. Neutral:

• It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: Y

5. Stable:

• It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: Y (Edit history and talk page are stable).

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:

• (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Y (Verified Wikimedia Commons licenses).
• (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Y

Overall verdict:

• Result:  Pass

Congratulations! This article easily meets all six criteria and is officially promoted to Good Article status.

Thanks User:Noukayami. SilkTork (talk) 09:32, 30 September 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.