Wikipedia:Peer review/2008 Mumbai attacks/archive2

2008 Mumbai attacks[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to try to work on this article to get it to FA status, given the importance of the article wrt the country. And for that, i would like to get a peer review so I can improve out the little bits to get it the FA status

Thanks, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:29, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I wouldn't mind doing this peer review. It is customary for the nominator to make a pass through the article first, fixing as much as they can, before requesting a peer review. I see that you made two edits to this article on 5 Nov 2012: the 2nd reverted the 1st. Are there any other edits you've made? If not, I recommend that you read the FA criteria at Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria, then go through the article sentence-by-sentence, making improvements that you can find. Then request a peer review. If you need help understanding the FA Criteria, or if you have any questions on how to apply them, I'd be happy to help ... just drop a note on my talk page. --Noleander (talk) 15:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To give you an idea of the sort of improvements that could be made:

In section "Kasab's trial" - first two paragraphs need citations
The article needs a subsection on "Motivations" explaining the suspected reasons/purposes/goals/etc of the terrorists.
Wording is not smooth & professional in some places. E.g. "There have been many bombings in Mumbai since the 13 coordinated bomb explosions that killed 257 people and injured 700 on 12 March 1993.[27] The 1993 attacks are believed to have been in retaliation for the Babri Mosque demolition.[28]" That section needs to be written to introduce the reader to the history: assume the reader has no knowledge of the history. As it is now, it assumes that the reader knows about the 1993 attack.
Run all the following tools on the article to find and fix some problems:

Find broken external URL links with http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=ARTICLENAMEHERE
Find ambig links with http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py?page=ARTICLENAMEHERE
Citation tool: This tool will edit the article and will combine duplicate cites: http://toolserver.org/~verisimilus/Bot/DOI_bot/doibot.php?edit=toolbar&slow=1&page=ARTICLENAMEHERE
Show Alt text for pictures with http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/altviewer.py?page=ARTICLENAMEHERE
Find repeating links with tool on left page sidebar
Copyright violations: Coren's tool
Another copyright vio: Earwigs tool

for example, the "broken external URL" tool shows several dead external links that need to be fixed. --Noleander (talk) 15:19, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]