Talk:Srirangam marriage hall fire/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Secret (talk · contribs) 17:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quick failing this GA as the prose of this article is not of GA quality...

Here is some comments I discovered

The ages of the accused is not needed per WP:MOS.
"The day of the marriage, 23 January 2004, was a Friday, which was considered auspicious as per Hindu custom." Why was it considered auspicuous?
"The marriage was celebrated in Padmapriya Marriage Hall, located in EV Srinivachari Road in Srirangam." the first in should be "at Padamapriya Marriage Hall" and the road is unneeded. Also sentence is unsourced
"The rescue operations were overseen by the then Collector of Tiruchirapalli, K. Manivasan, the Inspector-General of Police, S. George, the range DIG and City Police Commissioner, Sunil Kumar Singh.[3]" Several grammar issues with this sentence, especially with capitalized letters, complete names needed as well.
Most of the victims killed on the spot were the colleagues of the groom.[2] "on the spot" is not-needed.

This article is riddled with grammar errors, some unsourced sentences and prose problems so I'm failing this review. Secret ^account 17:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up the review. Some of the comments were not helpful and not subjective at all. If there is an accident, ppl can be killed on the spot, on the way to hospital or in the hospital. Others like road name not needed, capitals, ages seem to be small changes. Considered auspicious as per "Hindu custom" - so why is the question? All sentences are referenced - which one is missing ref? I will take to GOCE before renominating, but this is not a fast fail candidate.Ssriram mt (talk) 23:19, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]