Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Palak Muchhal/1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted per inadequate review and issues listed below Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:25, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a 2 year old GA article and while some things have ruined the article over time, some were sadly present even at the time of the review (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palak_Muchhal&oldid=575791817 reviewed version). As both nominator (User:Abhi) and reviewer (User:1ST7)aren’t active users now, I am going in for community review.

Article is full of poor quality non-WP:RS references: bollyspice.com, blogspot.com, planetbollywood.com, likemaza.tk, in.com, campaignindia.in, cinebag.com
Complete "Filmography" section is unsourced. Some entries are sourced in the prose above, but those references do not back up all the content of this section.
The readable prose is less than 1400 words and her "Charity work" section is more than 700 words. Gives impression that she is more notable as social worker and less as playback singer. But that’s not really true, I guess. So this undue weightage to charity works needs trimming.
Various unsourced entries in "Honors and awards" section. In addition, few awards are totally ridiculous and non-notable to be mentioned here; like Candyman Kuchh Bhi Karega award. Non-notable awards should not be included. Or else their notability should be proved.
There are other prose and style-related problems which can be fixed easily but these other problems listed are serious.
Various unsourced claims have also slipped in the article over time and I have tagged those.

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:44, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delist for now. Too many issues, needs hard work on this. Jimmy Aneja (talk) 17:12, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I haven't looked at the article yet, but I want to note that 1ST7 is the same user who passed Tara Teng as GA. sst✈^discuss 14:10, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Dubious GA review, many issues in article. sst✈^discuss 14:12, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Does not meet GA criteria, as outlined by the nominator.--Dwaipayan (talk) 19:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]