Talk:Coast Veddas/GA1

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Nevertheless they also inhabit a few south of Batticalao as well. - a few what south?

    Done

   Clans and family organization: this section appears to be about the interior Vedars. What is is its relevance here?

    Clarified the relationship

   Language: The first two sentences repeat information already given above.

    Done

   Consistency, sometimes they are described as Veddas sometimes as Vedars or Vedar. This is confusing.

    Interior Veddas versus Vedar clarifiedKanatonian (talk) 12:59, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   I assume good faith for all print sources.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Th Sri Lankan Civil War and its impact is mentioned, but is there anything about the conditions during the last few months of the war and now. Are they still in camps like much of \the Tamil population?

 I will check for any published information, although I doubt specific coverage about them...Kanatonian (talk) 12:59, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Ok, not essentila, I realise that it may be very hard to find details on this. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

3. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

4. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

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

5. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   OK, an interesting article. I am placing it on hold for seven days for the above issues to be addressed. Place any comments or responses here, I have watchlisted this page and will be checking regularly. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

   Thank you for the reworking. I am now happy to list this as a good article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]