Talk:Samosa/GA1

GA review

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

Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 17:00, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Chilicave (talk · contribs) 03:20, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy to review this article!

Many thanks. Please add any comments after the table for ease of reply. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:04, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Summary table

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

• This is a great article! The only one concern I have is the relevance of keeping the Al-Shabaab's samosa ban. This article beautifully covers the history and how samosa's vary in different cultures but the samosa ban just seems out of place in comparison. Furthermore, the article is from 2011 and is based off of speculation rather than clearly established facts.
  • Removed.

Happy to hear your thoughts on this:) Chilicave (talk)