- Lead
- Instituted on 2 January 1954
- Absent a compelling reason to be so specific, this might be better with just the year, as the lead is a summary.
- the award is conferred "in recognition of exceptional service/performance of the highest order", without distinction of race, occupation, position, or sex.
- Per WP:LEADCITE, this needs in-line attribution.
- I have not provided in-line citations in the lead per following mention at WP:LEADCITE. "Because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body, editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material."
- That applies to paraphrased/summarized material, but any and all direct quotes need inline citations even in the lead. RO(talk) 16:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Rationalobserver: Thanks for the clarification. I wasnt aware of the clause related to quotes. I have made the necessary changes. - Vivvt (Talk) 17:02, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- "any field of human endeavour"
- Same as above
- but are constitutionally prohibited from using the award name as a title.
- If the reasoning can be briefly explained than consider doing so. Otherwise, maybe leave this point out of the lead.
- The original statutes did not provide for posthumous awards but were amended in January 1955 to permit them.
- This might be overly detailed for the lead, but maybe not.
- I am also not sure. So, will keep it as is for now.
- The second paragraph of the lead has lots of dates. Some of these might not be necessary.
- the "posthumous" mention of Bose was much criticised,
- Drop the scare quotes.
- History
- A year later on 15 January 1955
- Either state it was a year later or include the date, but don't do both.
- Kept date to maintain consistency.
- became the youngest person and first sports-person
- Swap "sports-person" with athlete.
- As of 2015, the award has been conferred upon 45 people with 12 posthumous declarations.
- Each paragraph should end in a citation.
- Regulations
- Under the terms of Article 18 (1) of the Constitution of India,[b] the recipients cannot use the award as a prefix or suffix to their name,
- Why not?
- Detailed explanation is not mentioned in the constitution. That's why I didnt provide any further details...just to avoid WP:OR.
- Specifications
- A year later, the design was modified to the form that is currently in use.
- Drop "to the form that is currently in use."
- List of recipients
- This might be better at the end, rather than in the middle.
- Controversies
- The introductory sentence needs a citation.
- References
- I'm seeing a few harv errors at current refs #1, #73, #80, #84, #85, and #88. It looks like you need to add ref Thakur 2010 to the bibliography.
- Cleaned up the references. Thakur's book is claimed to have plagiarised from Wiki.
- Conclusion
I made a few edits ([1]). This is a fine piece of writing. It's very detailed without being overly so, and the prose is engaging and enjoyable. This is a very nice article. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 19:14, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Rationalobserver: I have made changes as per your suggestions. Please let me know if anything else needs to be corrected or changed. - Vivvt (Talk) 12:39, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks very good! Let me know when you take this to FAC. RO(talk) 17:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure. Thanks for your time. - Vivvt (Talk) 17:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
|