Jump to content

Talk:Badnam Basti

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 Amkgp (talk) 04:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

5x expanded by Ashwin147 (talk). Self-nominated at 06:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • Full review will be to follow, but before this is to be done, I suggest that the article be given a copyedit for grammar and punctuation (some references come before punctuation when they should come after). Article requirements do appear to be met. Of the two hooks, ALT0 is more interesting to a broad audience, but it seems to contradict a part of the article: it states that the film was considered a gay film, but this was contradicted by its director. Perhaps an additional hook that mentions that could also be proposed? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:32, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a request for copyediting at WP:GOCE/R. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:43, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed the issues on punctuation and referencing you've mentioned. Despite the director's refutation, the label appears to have stuck. Whether the characters are gay or bisexual is also debatable. I think all the media sources refer to the movie as being India's first gay movie but the cited books are more nuanced. So perhaps ALT0 can be accepted? Ashwin147 (talk) 11:27, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A revised version that mentions the director's contradiction could work in that case. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:50, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Where in the cited link does the director contradict this label? I think I'm missing out on something. Ashwin147 (talk) 05:36, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The relevant quote from the article is Although the movie has been labelled as India's first gay movie, Badnam Basti neither explicitly depicted nor identified the male characters as gay.. Perhaps "contradicted" is not the correct term here, instead it could be "unconfirmed" or similar wording. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Then I suggest that ALT0 be approved since the hook does not contradict the cited line and there is a discussion on the latter half of that line under the heading of Production. Any addition is likely to render the hook too wordy. Ashwin147 (talk) 09:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, I'm not sure how I misread that part. It wasn't the director but the film itself. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:43, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
While interesting, it not mentioning that the film is considered to be India's first gay film means the hook does not show the most significant aspect of the subject. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here are some possible suggestions:
ALT0a ... that the 1971 movie Badnam Basti is often described as India's first gay film, although this was never explicitly depicted in its story?
ALT2a ... that a print of the movie Badnam Basti, often described as India's first gay film, that was thought to have been lost was found in 2020 after nearly 50 years?
ALT2b ... that the 1971 movie Badnam Basti, considered to be India's first gay film, was thought to be lost until a copy was found in 2020?
Given that ALT0a introduces a new hook fact, another editor will be needed to review the hooks. I will be doing the other DYK-related checks shortly. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:09, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi, I came by to promote this, and copyedited the article as well as fixed the URLs. I added a "citation needed" tag to one of the quotes under Reception. It is also not clear who is saying the subsequent quotes. A number of the book refs need page numbers.
  • The wording of ALT2a could be tightened up this way:
  • ALT2c: ... that a print of the lost film Badnam Basti, often described as India's first gay film, was discovered in 2020 after nearly fifty years? Yoninah (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably for the best to leave the rest of the review to you since I had introduced a new hook fact earlier (even if the suggestion was rejected). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:25, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seems to have stalled. User has not edited since 13 August. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 16:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hidden review
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - The article says it was found in 2020 but there are other sources telling me that it was discovered in 2019. [1] [2]
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I also don't like the use of Medium, a site which anyone can write ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: would you like to adopt this? We don't need a review; we need someone to fix up the problems I mentioned above, and the ones you found, and get the article ready for the main page. You could take a DYK co-credit too. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 18:11, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, CAPTAIN MEDUSA! Your technical expertise with referencing and archiving is appreciated. I've added you to the co-creation credits. The article looks good now. We just need to change the hook because the film was only lost for 40 years. Here is a new alt:
  • ALT2d: ... that a print of Badnam Basti, often described as India's first gay film, was discovered in 2020 after being lost for 40 years?
  • ALT2d ref verified and cited inline per Vincent60030's review. Restoring tick for ALT2d. Yoninah (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Badnam_Basti&oldid=1205607262"