Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Taj Mahal/archive2
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was archived by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2015 [1].
Taj Mahal edit
- Nominator(s): Atsme and -The Herald • the joy of the LORDmy strength 04:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This article is about the famed white marble mausoleum in Agra, India. The article is good in all aspects and literally its a GA. Finely cited and broad in its coverage and well illustrated. Thanks..-The Herald • the joy of the LORDmy strength 04:47, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The Lead is not an adequate standalone summary of the rest of the article as is required even for GA status. Also still seems to rely primarily on news media sources, and not much engagement with the academic literature. Also the engagement with the well known context of the love story that inspired its building is cursory, and extremely dry. There is a large literature on this topic alone which is not being engaged. Definitely more historical and cultural background seems to be needed, if the love story is a myth then at least that myth needs to be mentioned and debunked. If it is not a myth then a lot more of it needs to be included. ·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:01, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and suggest withdrawal. The are numerous unsourced statements throughout the article. Graham Beards (talk) 09:49, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Coordinator note - I appreciate the hard work that has been put into this thus far, but it is quite clearly not up to FA standards and I will be archiving this nomination shortly. Aside from basic problems such as uncited text and MOS issues, important scholarly sources about the subject have not been used as Maunus pointed out. I would urge you engage subject matter experts to ensure you are using the proper sources. After building out and polishing the article, I would urge you to open a peer review in which you invite comment from other Wikipedia editors who have written FAs in similar areas. --Laser brain (talk) 11:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. --Laser brain (talk) 11:26, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.