Article(edit | visual edit | history)·Article talk(edit | history)·Watch
There has been discussion on the talk page here and here, as well as at other venues, eg: here, from which it is clear that several people are not satisfied that this article meets the standards expected of a GA. Some of the issues have been fixed already but others remain. These include:
Failure to use the "heavyweight" academic sources that were listed when the GAN occurred
Factual problems that may be inaccuracies or inconsistencies in the sources (some that have been fixed were outright wrong)
Sorting this lot out may take some time as it will require a review of the major uncited sources, such as those listed in the further reading section. - Sitush (talk) 10:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A review of opinions expressed in the threads linked above suggests that a speedy delist might be appropriate. However, I'm reluctant to do that unless people indicate the same position here, since this is supposed to be the focus of any work and decision. - Sitush (talk) 11:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A copyright violation has now been found also (well, almost word-for-word, so technically close paraphrasing) - see this edit for the fix. I suppose there may be more. - Sitush (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments This article should never have been promoted to GA, given the issues of sourcing, writing and MOS. It has been improved since the promotion thanks to the efforts of User:Sitush, User:Drmieset al, but it still does not meet the GA standard. Some particular issues:
When passed the lede had the sentences, At that time, north India was ruled by Ibrahim Lodi of the Lodi dynasty. In 1524, he got an invitation from his uncle Daulat Khan Lodi to overthrow Ibrahim and establish his rule. in which the referents for the pronouns were unclear. Since then the senetences have been rewritten In 1524, Daulat Khan Lodi invited his nephew, Babur, to overthrow Ibrahim and become ruler. Can someone verify that Daulat Khan Lodi was the uncle of Babur and not Ibrahim? It's possible, but wanted to be sure.
The Personal life and relationships was/is based mainly on primary autobiographical sources, which cannot be used for self-serving claims such as Unlike his father, he had ascetic tendencies and did not have any great interest in women....Babur treated them and his other women relatives well., especially without attributing them to the source. Also the section (like others) has numerous prose issues, eg
grammatical errors, (...who was was five years old);
redundant prose (He had one daughter by her, Fakhr-un-Nissa, who died as an infant within a year in 1500 AD.)
colloquial prose (In the period 1506-08, Babar married four women, being...)
Many of the cited references are missing publisher and year information (which would have made their relatively poor/dated quality clearer), and many of the refs need to be consolidated, eg 35-36, 39-42 in this version.
The above issues are relatively easy to deal with and could/should have been handled prior to the promotion. But the main issue is that the article does not cite some of the best available sources on the subject, which are currently listed in the Further reading section. Fixing this will take more time and effort. Abecedare (talk) 17:15, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm quite optimistic about the eventual result of this article even if it gets delisted. I have been a long watcher and even added few parts years ago (the sexuality part was added by me...haha). If we ignore the minor drama, I'm in the end glad that the cavalry arrived (Sitush and all) and it got its deserved attention. Anyway just trying to cheer everyone up here and sorry couldn't add or do any helpful, I'm held up and barely followed the old GA review. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:08, 13 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Closing as delist
Clear consensus to delist. Variety of issues remain weeks after they were raised relating to prose, sourcing, and MOS. Cowlibob (talk) 21:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]