Talk:Prayagraj/GA2

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vensatry (talk · contribs) 13:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

• I'll take up this review. Will post my initial set of comments soon —Vensatry _(Ping) 13:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Lead

• "Allahabad is the seventh most populous city in the state and the thirty-sixth most populous city in India" needs "As of ..."
• "In 2011, it was ranked the world's 130th fastest growing city" – unsourced
• Page nos. needed for ref #8
• "The city's original name – Prayaga, or "place of offerings" – comes from its position at the sacred union of the rivers Ganges, Yamuna and Saraswati": Sentence is unclear. How do you correlate "place of offerings" with "sacred union".
• The fact that Allahabad is the second-oldest city in India is unsourced and present only at the lead
• I'm not sure what you mean by "plays a central role in the Hindu scriptures"
• Link Doab
• Area of 63.07 km2 is not mentioned anywhere in the article except lead
• Allahabad City Council – ditto
• You say that the city is the second-oldest in India while infobox mentions that it was founded in 1583 AD
• Area of metropolitan city equals 5,424 km2 – not true, it's the area of the district

Etymology

• The section is too small. Perhaps consider merging it with History if it can't be expanded further

Demographics

• "Provisional data suggest a density of 1,087 people per km2 in 2011, compared to 901 in 2001" pertains to district data
• The following sentences are either unsourced or incorrectly sourced
• The last para of the section is sourced to "Provisional Population Totals, Census of India 2011; Urban Agglomerations/Cities having population 1 lakh and above" which no way conveys the information presented in the article.
  • I've not fully read the article. After going through a few sections, it feels like criterion 1 and 2 are not met. The prose is weak in many places, and many facts need to satisfy WP:V. The article needs to have a thorough copy-edit by a GOCE member. For now, I'm stopping my review and will have a look at it tomorrow. —Vensatry _(Ping) 12:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

• It's been close to a week since I started the review. The nominator is yet to respond even after knowing that the review has started. Therefore, I'm 'failing this review. —Vensatry _(Ping) 08:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)