Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Assessment/Cochin International Airport
Cochin International Airport[edit]
- 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.
Hi folks, I feel Cochin International Airport if fit for a review for A Class level, as the page has significantly improved with qualitative information, citations, references, encyclopedic content and pictures. I feel the article is fit for an A status. Kindly review it --Arunvarmaother (talk) 17:45, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article reads like a brochure or essay rather than an encyclopedic article. The article is filled with lot of unwanted and irrelevant minute details.
Most of the citations are not working or false and majority of the claims are not cited. There are lot of space to improve in grammar, content and credibility.
Even though the article has improved in length, quality is lacking. In short, the article is not yet ready for Class A. -- Induzcreed (talk) 12:27, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The track-record of above user- Induzcreed is very dubious, as he was interested to vandalize several Kochi related pages and articles. Even in review stage, the above user hasn't mentioned which citations links is missing, which citations are false, which claims he is talking specifically, which is not the style or the format of a review. When determining quality, such as grammar, prose style, the above user hasn't mentioned specifically. If he has specific issues, he must point out, which he failed. A general statement, shows his basic idea in ensuring a good article that goes against his motives and interest, pass review test. On a closer look, Cochin Airport page has one of the highest number of citations which rarely any other similar page have, which proves its validity. I request senior and other individuals, who have experience in reviewing articles to review and consider the article--Arunvarmaother (talk) 16:18, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I too back Induzcreed in this matter. The article is written much sloapy and puffery. Many claims are not cited. Some cited sources does not actually back the claim made. For instance, a lead sentence "The Cochin airport has been termed as one of the most consistent profitable airport in India despite the major slowdown across the airports in various cities in India" looks like an attempt to boost the airport. None of the citations clearly says anything about CIAL being the most profitable. The fact is that all international airports in India are profitable, and cochin airport is also one of them. But the lead sentence gives the reader a false or confused message. The article length is another concern. So many minute details and silly information are added, which reduces the quality of the article. --Samaleks (talk) 16:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Many sentences reads like a blog entry. For eg; the sentence "It was then, V.J Kurien proposed the model of private-public partnership which was unheard at that time." How the editor arrived at the thought that no one was aware about private-public partnership? Another one : "Though the project received several objections and criticisms for proposing it outside Government of India's control, the strong determination of V.J Kurien, helped it to start." What were the objections and criticisms? Please provide citations. It sounds a little peacock-word for V.J.Kurien; isn't it ? Another example of false claim : "The airport area is under direct protection of Kochi Airport Police having a police station outside the terminal." There is no force called Kochi Airport Police. The internal link is given to "Kochi city police" and is masked with "Kochi Airport Police". If it is the city police that is in charge of the protection, why it should be named as Kochi Airport Police in the article? The sentence could be like "Kochi city police in in charge of the airport protection" as it would be more precise and conveys a clear message; right? There are numerous flaws in the article, and is way far from a Class A status now. I request the editors attached with this article to pitch in to rectify these negetives. --Samaleks (talk) 16:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you check the citations, you will understand the sentence meaning. I can comment on your first example, The Cochin airport has been termed as one of the most consistent profitable airport in India despite the major slowdown across the airports in various cities in India
The links justifies the claims, especially a few newspaper reports like Hindu etc. In India, only a few airports are profitable. For example even large airports like Hyderabad, New Delhi Airports are in Loss http://www.livemint.com/2010/09/27002625/Hyderabad-airport-seeks-hike-i.html. Only a very few airports are profitable, say Chennai, Mumbai, Cochin etc. Cochin Airport recorded consistent profits since 2002, and profit percentages only soar even in recession, instead of decline. The statement is CIAL is ONE OF THE PROFITABLE, not the ONLY PROFITABLE. So that justifies the claim.
Regarding VJ Kurien, the PDF citations along with CIAL's website citations quotes, that it was his determination that made the airport. An Interview with him in a respectable website like Rediff is given, to show the extent of determination and troubles which he faced to start the airport. So it due respect must be given to its founder director. The level of criticisms were mentioned in that PDF citation, made as a case study for Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad, an authority in this area. CIAL was the first case of PPP model in India, as there were no Public-Private partnership models prior to 1997. So its naturally unheard in the country.
Finally, there is not police called airport police, but definetly has a police station called Airport Police Station, established for external security. http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/20/stories/2008102058250300.htm. Do you think, what name should we give to a police force operating inside an airport, other than airport police?
I thank for your suggestions, but must consider the extent of citations given and must go through it in detail, rather looking things superficial.--Arunvarmaother (talk) 09:16, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I am not here for an argument. I just shared my thoughts, thats all. You have done a really great job in expanding the article. Many details are added, and arranged in a good manner. But I feel that as a whole, the article needs further improvement. I am sure that you can do that. Please attend to the points I made earlier. I feel that it is not addressed, but justified here. For eg; I still feel that masking the airport police is not accurate. The sentence can be rewritten as "Kochi city police in in charge of the airport protection" as it would be more precise and conveys a clear message. This is just one example. Thanks a lot, --Samaleks (talk) 07:18, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Several paragraphs in the article read just like an advertisement. Who has written them that way? It is the nom - Arunvarmaother. He had added several unwanted/repeated images to the article (which are deleted from wiki now). He used to add info just based on his thoughts, does not want to believe in facts. Even some of the citations that he provided were either outdated or out-of-context. This issue was raised several times by the user Induzcreed, and Mr Arunvarmaother considers the former to be vandalising the article. There is a clear violation of NPOV in the article apart from it being written like an advertisement. Until the entire article is re-written to meet wikipedia standards, I do not think this article would qualify for an A-class status. I am not against the article, but once it is re-written to meet wikipedia standards, I would definitely support the cause for it to get an A-Class stats. Until then, sorry. --Abhishek191288 (talk) 16:00, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Out of curiosity, wouldn't it make more sense to get the article to GA class, or even B class, before attempting an A-class review? Frankly, just looking at the article I could already tell you that it would fail GA review for not adhering to WP:LEAD. (At the very least, leads should summarize, not introduce new information, so there should not be any references in it.) Additionally there are entire paragraphs with no citation -- see first paragraph section Management, first paragraph section Expansion, last paragraph section Construction, and so on. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 13:08, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I share some similarities with Mukkakukaku's viewpoint: This article isn't ready for A class quality assessment; it wouldn't make the grade for GA as it is. Lots and lots of paragraphs that are uncited; and the coverage in places is far from what is to be expected, for instance the history for 80 years of operations is only three paragraphs in length, I'd expect there to be far more that could be being said and thus grounds to question the level of coverage, which isn't what I'd expect in an A Quality candidate. The article needs considerable development before it can be properly gauged at this level; keep working on it, and use the examples of existing GA-type airport articles for help, and it can make it in due time. Kyteto (talk) 17:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.