Talk:Squash in India

Did you know nomination

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 Yoninah (talk) 16:05, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that squash was introduced into India by the British forces, during their rule? Source: refs: [1] [2]
  • ALT1:... that squash in India was introduced by the British forces? Source: same as above

5x expanded by Shanze1 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC).

• Comment I just noticed the Wikipedia:Did_you_know/Supplementary_guidelines#A5. I've copied about 5-6 paragraphs from another article and modified/expanded that (probably not 5x). A5 however states, "copied text must be expanded fivefold as if the copied text had been a separate article". But I feel like more expansion is not feasible here. I'm not sure if this affects eligibility. If it does, I would like to know what can be done here. The copied texts didn't even have references. I added them on my own. So, can I like get rid of all copied text and rewrite them on my own? Also, article was already 5x expanded before this edit: copied diff Shanze1 (talk) 08:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Regarding A5, I am passing this article on the basis that there is 5x expansion on the original text, even excluding the text copied and modified from the other article. While not affecting DKY eligibility, some of the citations need a bit of work, eg. The Study on Squash in India should have its publisher spelt out, and the source used for the current hook uses the title for the website rather than the title for that particular page. However, I do not feel the proposed hooks are interesting to a broad audience. There is more interesting information in the article, for example about historical class association, the source of which goes into more information about the current situation not in the article, so I suggest thinking about new hooks. CMD (talk) 10:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

This nomination appears to have gone stale, with no action by the nominator or edits to the article within two weeks. Unless resolved or adopted by someone else within a week, the nomination should be closed. Flibirigit (talk) 03:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

The nominator hasn't edited since June 28th; I've however left them a final talk page message inviting them to return to the nomination. If there's no response within the next few days this can be closed. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Uhhg stale nomination? I copyedited the article per request for the purposes of this, and here we are. I might as well have to take over this nomination. I'll address the issue on the citations and other general content issues, and maybe new hooks, and that's it. Can I Log In (talk) 14:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Chipmunkdavis, it appears that Can I Log In is adopting the nomination. Would you like to follow-up on the review? Flibirigit (talk) 19:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

No problem, Can I Log In feel free to ping me when copyediting is done and new hooks are ready. CMD (talk) 03:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

• Please note that nominator Shanze1 now has five DYK credits, so a QPQ will need to be supplied for this nomination before it can be passed. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:20, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

---

• ​It has been 3 weeks, and the original nominator has not edited. They resuced 16 sources, and there wasn't really much to do with the citation formatting; I soon got bored. I can't find much sources to support the hook other than in the title. I only got 2 proposed hooks, and that's it. However, this was tricky since it is a "noun @ place".
  • ALT2: ... that the British Raj restricted access to Indian squash courts in military bases to the upper class of society?
  • ALT3: ... that Indian squash courts in military bases were made to entertain officers?
• And that's it, I'm outta here. QPQ, apparently the nominator is on commons, so I left an interwiki talkback. If this nomination is approved excluding QPQ, then this will be on hold and all we need is a simple fast review from this origignal nominator. Can I Log In (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Can I Log In, the article is in a much better shape. I have no problems with either proposed hook. CMD (talk) 10:37, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: do you have any DYK criteria concerns for this nomination besides the QPQ credit? Flibirigit (talk) 00:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

No, I feel the current iteration meets DYK requirements. CMD (talk) 00:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I have added a DYK credit for contributions by Can I Log In (talk · contribs). @Chipmunkdavis:, I am donating a QPQ credit from my review at Gay fascism in the interest of moving this nomination forward. Flibirigit (talk) 01:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for adding that credit, that is appropriate. Given the original editor has not edited in a few weeks, I agree with the donated QPQ.

ALT2 and ALT3. CMD (talk) 01:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Uhh, I am not a DYK person, but I'm pretty sure QPQ has to be done by the nominator. Is there something I'm unaware of this QPQ "donation"? Can I Log In (talk) 01:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't think there is any formal documentation, but I've seen the concept bandied about on the discussion page. As I said, I'm happy to take it in this instance as the nominator has not edited for a few weeks, in addition to the consideration that the nominator did not need a QPQ when this was initially submitted. CMD (talk) 01:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)