Talk:Taj Mahal

Taj Mahal was nominated as a Art and architecture good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (July 2, 2024, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Taj Mahal 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: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 90 days

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Taj Mahal was one of the Art and architecture good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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
January 1, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
June 16, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
September 28, 2006	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 6, 2007	Good article reassessment	Kept
August 16, 2009	Good article reassessment	Kept
April 2, 2015	Peer review	Reviewed
May 11, 2015	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
November 17, 2018	Peer review	Reviewed
March 4, 2021	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 17, 2019, June 17, 2023, and June 17, 2024.
Current status: Delisted good article

Other talk page banners

Islam

	Islam portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

India: History / Protected areas 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 the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Protected areas of India workgroup (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article was last assessed in April 2021.

Architecture Top‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

World Heritage Sites Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject World Heritage Sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of World Heritage 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.World Heritage SitesWikipedia:WikiProject World Heritage SitesTemplate:WikiProject World Heritage SitesWorld Heritage Sites articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cemeteries High‑importance

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Srd1212 (article contribs).

Good article reassessment[edit]

Taj Mahal[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: delisted (t · c) buidhe 18:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article has multiple 'citation needed' tags. A few citations are lacking some parameters. Further, the article does not adequately describe (Hindutva) hatred towards the monument. Historical detailing related to its construction fails to provide enough context. DTM (talk) 11:36, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the 'Gallery' section of the article should be removed at least, per WP:GALLERY. --Yoonadue (talk) 16:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Islam Info Box[edit]

The Taj Mahal has a mosque on its grounds, has Quranic scripture on its walls, and is a tomb for Muslim royalty. As such, especially the first point, I believe the info box should list its affiliation as Islam or Sunni Islam, and the info box should be made green. Thoughts on this?

Remove the big autopromo[edit]

There is a huge autopromo message from a banned user, we could get rid off. Обмен (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be template vandalism, so I've removed the IPAc-en template temporarily. This is unlikely to be an issue with just this article, so I'll look into it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

؟[edit]

In the paragraph on the origin of words, what is the relationship with Persian?

What is the relationship between Persian? The two words are Arabic. Then why is there a common origin, Arabic and Persian, even though there is no such thing in the first place? 109.107.251.106 (talk) 17:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Taj Mahal/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 10:42, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: PearlyGigs (talk · contribs) 21:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starting review[edit]

Hi, Magentic Manifestations. I'll do this review. There is a GAN backlog drive this month. Hope to have some feedback soon. PearlyGigs (talk) 21:35, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. I would like to point to User talk:Magentic Manifestations#Taj Mahal, regarding other major contributors/co-nominators of the GAC. Thanks. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 00:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, The Herald and DreamRimmer. I'll include you both if I have any questions. I'm afraid I haven't had much time for WP today and I've only skimmed the article so far. Hope to have something for you soon. Best wishes. PearlyGigs (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spot-checks[edit]

I've looked through the list of sources and have no immediate questions, so I'll move on to the required spot-checks. I'm starting with six statements taken in no particular order:

FN 10 & 11 – The Taj Mahal was commissioned by Shah Jahan in 1631, to be built in the memory of his wife Mumtaz Mahal, who died on 17 June that year while giving birth to their 14th child, Gauhara Begum.

FN 10 is Asher 1992, page 210 which links to Google Books. I input a search for Shah Jahan and, although several pages were returned, page 210 was not and so this citation doesn't appear to verify the statement.

FN 11 is a direct link to Tresures of the World. This says Mumtaz Mahal died in April 1631 and does not name Gauhara Begum. While it does say that Shah Jahan "laid the foundation" six months after she died, it is rather vague and does not convey the sense that he purposefully commissioned the building.

Unverified.

FN 28 – The calligraphy on the southern gate roughly translates to "O Soul, thou art at rest. Return to the Lord at peace with Him, and He at peace with you".

The link is to a page that is "no longer available".

Unverified.

FN 36 – The elevated marble water tank is called al Hawd al-Kawthar in reference to the "Tank of Abundance" promised to Muhammad.

The statement expresses certainty but Begley actually says: the raised marble tank in the center of the garden was probably intended as a replica of the celestial tank of abundance called al-Kawthar, promised to Muhammad (my italics). Begley's meaning is different and the article does not reflect what the source says.

Unverified.

FN 83 – Lists of recommended travel destinations often feature the Taj Mahal, which also appears in several listings of seven wonders of the modern world, including the New Seven Wonders of the World, a poll conducted in 2007.

The source only verifies the fact of a 2007 poll in one newspaper. It does not confirm "lists of destinations" or "several listings".

Partially verified. More sources are needed for the first two clauses.

FN 98 & 99 – Several court cases and statements by right-wing politicians about Taj Mahal being a Hindu temple have been inspired by P. N. Oak's 1989 book Taj Mahal: The True Story, in which he claimed it was built in 1155 AD and not in the 17th century.

The citations link to news stories in the Hindustan Times and India Today. Neither piece mentions 1155 or right-wing politicians.

Unverified.

FN 102 – Another such unsupported theory, that the Taj Mahal was designed by an Italian, Geronimo Vereneo, held sway for a brief period after it was first promoted by Henry George Keene in 1879. Keene went by a translation of a Spanish work, Itinerario (The Travels of Fray Sebastian Manrique, 1629–1643). Another theory, that a Frenchman named Austin of Bordeaux designed the Taj, was promoted by William Henry Sleeman based on the work of Jean-Baptiste Tavernier. These ideas were revived by Father Hosten and discussed again by E. B. Havell and served as the basis for subsequent theories and controversies.

I cannot read more than one page of The Vereneo Controversy so I cannot tell if the whole of Dixon's article supports the above paragraph.

Confirmation is needed that Dixon's article covers everything in the paragraph, especially Keene in 1879; the Itinerario; Austin; Sleeman; Tavernier; Hosten; and Havell. Incidentally, the source begins with a view expressed by Lutyens but he is not mentioned in the article.

Result[edit]

Of the six statements chosen for the required spot-checks, four are completely unverified and one is partially verified. The sixth requires confirmation of seven specific points and it is already apparent that the article does not include the source's opening and, presumably, most salient argument.

WP:GACR states unambiguously that an article may be failed without further review if, prior to the review it is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria. The second criterion is that all sources must be verifiable, but none of the six chosen for spot-check can be fully verified. I have to conclude that the article is "a long way from meeting GACR #2" and I am therefore closing this review with WP:GAFAIL.

A lot more work will be needed before this article is ready for WP:GAN and, in particular, all citations need to be thoroughly reviewed to ensure that they are fit for purpose. PearlyGigs (talk) 21:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]