Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Kunwar Singh Negi

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by  MPJ-DK  01:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Kunwar Singh Negi

[edit]
(
)

Created by Dharmadhyaksha (talk). Self-nominated at 09:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC).

  • No issues found with article, ready for human review.
    • ✓ This article is new and was created on 09:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 2211 characters
    • ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
    • ✓ This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
    • ✓ A copyright violation is unlikely (1.0% confidence; confirm)
      • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
  • No overall issues detected

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This bot is experimental; please report any issues. This is not a substitute for a human review. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 20:28, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Per DYKReviewBot above novelty, length, policy, hook length and QPQ all check out. The hook is interesting and cited, but slightly awkwardly worded. I'd suggest the following alternatives to the nominator:
The second is a more interesting fact from the article, in my opinion. Joe Roe (talk) 11:10, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
All alts are fine with me. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:41, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Good to go, then. Joe Roe (talk) 22:14, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
  • New reviewer needed for ALT1 and ALT2 hooks. (Since Joe Roe proposed ALT1 and ALT2, he is not eligible to review them.) Also, as the bot is inherently unreliable when it comes to close paraphrasing/copyvio, an independent check of that should be done, as should neutrality checks. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:29, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Hmmmm! Now that we have gone in loop again to wait for a new reviewer, I think I should have objected to the Alts and insisted that original hook be passed. It isn't that awkwardly worded anyways. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:58, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Actually, it is awkward enough, Dharmadhyaksha. I've struck it. (If you have say "isn't that awkwardly worded", then it's too awkward for DYK.) Sorry. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • If the proposed hook is awkward, to whatever level, it should be copyedited to make it not-awkward. Joe's ALT1 was one such attempt which simply put the original hook. Why should a new reviewer be needed to verify that same thing which Joe has already done? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:57, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Dharmadhyaksha, Joe's ALT1 added new facts, "braille editor" and "highest civilian awards", to the mix, so someone else would need to do a new review that includes confirming that these facts are in the article and its sources, and sourced by the end of the sentences in which they appear. (If you're asking why if Joe has made the hook while reviewing he needs to be checked by another reviewer, it's because even the best reviewers sometimes don't do their own checking well and miss things. It's happened to reviewers I respect greatly, and I've made hook errors myself.) And sometimes hooks are awkward in ways that do not make them easily copyedited; what's needed in that case is a revision that perhaps omits a fact or a clause and reorganizes the rest. It isn't always easy to remove awkwardness while retaining all the information of the original. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:11, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I propose Alt3 below which removes awkwardness from original hook without altering facts. Will that be selected without much ado? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 06:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Dharmadhyaksha, to me ALT3 is not interesting: I'm sure there are plenty of Indians who have received civilian awards. So without interest, I don't see why the hook would be approved or selected. (A smoother version would be: ALT3a ... that Kunwar Singh Negi received the Indian civilian awards Padma Shri in 1981 and Padma Bhushan in 1990?) You've lost the interesting details, such as braille editor, that these are the highest civilian awards (if they are), and (from your original) why he received the awards. If you have factual objections to Joe's ALT hooks, by all means raise them, but if this is solely because of a potential delay in approval—I see you are a WikiCup competitor, and the current round ends on August 29—it's better to proceed with stronger hooks, even if it may take a little longer and delay the awarding of points to the next round. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, many people receive both awards but this fellow got one in social work and the other one in literature; which was something unique but awkward enough beyond repair to you both. Hence I proposed something simple. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 10:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • New reviewer still needed to check all the ALT hooks, including whether they are interesting. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ALT1, ALT2, and ALT3 are all verified, ALT3a contains same info as ALT3 and thus is also verified. I personally think ALT1 is verified, but given that the two awards are the third-and fourth-highest civilian awards, someone might quibble about "highest". ALT2 mentions the braille translation work, which is pretty much why this individual is notable, so if I were the promoter, I'd use that one, but ALT3 or 3a are perfectly acceptable. I shall leave the final call to the promoter. Montanabw(talk) 21:30, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Kunwar_Singh_Negi&oldid=1018279380"