This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cemeteries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Cemeteries 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.CemeteriesWikipedia:WikiProject CemeteriesTemplate:WikiProject CemeteriesCemeteries articles
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
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)
Thank you for your work on improving this article. Unfortunately, this is quick fail due to it being far from meeting several GA criteria. Among other issues described below, the article attempts to cover too many topics at once without providing sufficient historical context and by relying on a very limited number of sources. Paragraphs are too short and the reader is left wanting and confused. I would encourage the nominator to rethink the structure or consider splitting the article. More details are provided in the review table. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Ppt91talk18:37, 1 July 2023 (UTC)reply
The article's lead consists of only two sentences and the article does not follow
WP:LAYOUT guidelines, tackling too many topics at once without providing sufficient historical detail.
It appears that the two sources are verifiable and correctly referenced, although it primarily relies on two books, which does not seem to be enough for such a broad-ranging architectural topic with multiple different buildings.
Fails at least 3 criteria, which results in a quick fail.
(Criteria marked are unassessed)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.