Talk:Lakshadweep

Lakshadweep is currently a Places good article nominee. Nominated by Magentic Manifestations (talk) at 15:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

An editor has placed this article on hold to allow improvements to be made to satisfy the good article criteria. Recommendations have been left on the review page, and editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article.

Short description: Union territory of India

Lakshadweep was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 1, 2012	Good article nominee	Not listed

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lakshadweep article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

India: Lakshadweep / States Top‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Lakshadweep (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Indian states (assessed as Top-importance).

Islands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Sidhant Sibal (January 10, 2024). "Wikipedia, Google searches for Lakshadweep hit an all-time high". WION. Retrieved January 12, 2024. The archipelago, famed for its pristine beauty, has seen an unprecedented spike in views on its Wikipedia page, soaring from an average of under 2,000 to a staggering 700,000 views in just four days – starting from January 5, 2024.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

January 7 to 13, 2024 (15th)

Placing Religion as a subsection Demographics

I'm of the opinion that religion can be placed as a subsection under Demographics section as inline with all other Union territory pages. Editormallu (talk) 14:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Lakshadweep Beach: A Hidden Gem in India for Beach Lovers"

"Lakshadweep Beach: A Hidden Gem in India for Beach Lovers" transport and food and budget travel guide,tips https://www.beachesride.com/2023/03/lakshadweep-beach-hidden-gem-in-india.html?m=1 Beachesride (talk) 06:58, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Replacement

The {{Infobox settlement}} used on this page is going to be replaced with {{Infobox Indian state or territory}} as per the Proposal and consensus of RFC. Any questions/suggestions? Discuss Here.

You can also contribute by replacing Infobox settlement with Infobox Indian state or territory on other pages , or by improving this one. Tojoroy20 (talk) 17:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Replaced — Tojoroy20 (talk) 20:42, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

IN-LD.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:54, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Population of 2015 is missing

Why?? 1.38.51.25 (talk) 16:12, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need a good, big map

Just my two cents, but the only map of the archipelago is the India map at the head where the islands are circled. Good for the lede, but the group is barely visible - let alone individual islands. At least in the geography section, we need a nice, close-in map that clearly illustrates the archipelago. HalfdanRagnarsson (talk) 15:43, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good map which could be added. @ User:Magentic Manifestations [1]https://cdn.s3waas.gov.in/s358238e9ae2dd305d79c2ebc8c1883422/uploads/2018/03/2018031688.jpg
Anish Viswa 06:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"LAKSHADWEEP" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect LAKSHADWEEP has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 5 § Some overly capitalized redirects until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:10, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Lakshadweep/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 15:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Ajay Platinum (talk · contribs) 17:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article. Feel free to push back against anything you disagree with - very few, if any, of the things I'll mention will individually be worth a GA fail on their own. Any changes too minor to bother you with, I'll just do directly in the article - but feel free to revert or question any of those as well.

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Barring minor punctuation and grammatical issues, the article reads well. I have corrected most minor issues during my review. I have some notes/suggestions:
(1) A single line of thought for each sentence. For instance, when listing the three island sub-groups, adding their geographic separators may be confusing. You can use parentheses or a new sentence to break up the information.
(2) Consistent spelling and punctuation. I understand that words in a non-English script can be difficult to anglicize, especially those without a standard. Try sticking to a single spelling (for instance, Kolathiri vs. Kolattiri). Consistency in the usage of an Oxford comma and the British vs. American spellings is required.
(3) Maintain the flow of thought by placing similar content together. For example, when talking about the tuna fishing industry, follow it up with the tuna canning centre run by the government, and then move on to the types of boats used for general fishing.
(4) The introduction is verbose. As our aim with the lead is to summarize the article, perhaps you could shorten the text on the location, geography, and history.
Appreciate your comments and efforts aimed at correcting these. Broadly agree with your first three comments. Regarding the lead, while four paragraphs are the norm, I do agree that some things can be trimmed such as the history part. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 10:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for summarizing the lead. This criteria was an easy pass because of the effort you've put in. Ajay Platinum (talk) 02:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
Statements are backed by government/authoritative sources and cited inline. no original research visible and Earwig does not indicate copyvio issues. Spot-check shows some URLs are broken/unsecure. Some pages appear to be broken or have permanently moved, so not much we can do there. Please let me know once you've gone through this list of problematic sources and whether you can fix any. I'm setting the status to hold until then.

2 (broken link; please check if [2] is the intended source and replace if correct), 23 (unsecure URL, correct archive), 28 (unsecure URL), 30 (unsecure URL), 42 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 44 (URL only to Marine Mammals homepage, archive unrelated to citation), 45 (URL only to Marine Mammals homepage, archive unrelated to citation), 48 (unsecure URL), 57 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 65 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 67 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 68 (unsecure URL), 74 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 89 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 94 (URL does not exist, correct archive), 95 (URL does not exist, correct archive).

@Ajay Platinum, my reverts on the links below:

2, 28, 30, 57, 65, 67, 68, 74, 94, 95 - fixed
23, 42, 44, 45, 89 - permanently broken, archives are available for the links
48 - official source, secure archive provided

Do let me know in case of further clarification. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 09:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The article covers major aspects of the subject and each section is focused. The introduction has been edited by the nominator to be more concise.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Neutral tone and unbiased content. Sticks to the facts and does not jump to conclusions. Well written.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
On hold because user:Tera Ranjit Punjabi and 2 anonymous IPs have forcefully reverted incorrect edits to this article in the last month (October 2024), and were on the verge of violating the WP:3RR rule. While there is no edit war as per the Wiki definition, I recommend waiting an additional 7 days to confirm that this article is stable. If all is well, the status shall be changed to Pass.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
All images have appropriate tags, are free-use (from Commons), and the captions are suitable. Good selection of images to showcase the biodiversity.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
The article is passing in most criteria but is on hold to identify whether the broken source URLs can be fixed and to verify that the article is stable. If no vandalism occurs by Friday, 25 October 2024, the status of GA criteria 5 shall be changed to Pass. As the archived URLs for broken references are functional, the status of GA criteria 2 shall also be changed to pass if the either the nominator fixes the links of confirms that the links are permanently broken.

Ajay Platinum (talk) 17:05, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]