Template:Did you know nominations/Ek Hi Raasta (1956 film)
- 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 97198 (talk) 11:47, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ek Hi Raasta (1956 film)
[edit]- ... that the Hindi film Ek Hi Raasta was directed and produced by the Dadasaheb Phalke Award winner B. R. Chopra?
- Reviewed: Alajuela Province
Created by Jim Cartar (talk), Philg88 (talk). Nominated by MelanieN (talk) at 14:42, 4 June 2014 (UTC).
- Added Philg88 to the credit list. He has made significant contributions for the improvement of the article. Jim Carter (talk) 15:24, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- Comment (not explicitly supporting/opposing as I've recently had a run-in with the creator on an unrelated matter): The only source for the hook has the tell-tale "edit this page" link, and doesn't appear to be a reliable source. Our own article on Baldev Raj Chopra lists him as the director, not the producer, and specifically says that the first film he produced was Naya Daur a year after this. If you can find a legitimate source for Chopra producing this, that would make it his first production, which would be a far less boring hook. Mogism (talk) 15:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- No Mogism the coverage on Wikipedia about Indian Cinema is still poor. Please take a look at the orginal poster of the film (look at the top of the image) It has been mentioned about B. R. Films production. If the poster itself says that the film was produced by B. R. Films i.e. Baldev Raj film productions then what is the need to ask for other source. I think the current hook is not so boring that it can't appear on the Main page. Don't forget that Dadasaheb is the highest Indian cinema award. Jim Carter (talk) 16:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
- Update I have added two extra inline reliable sources to support the hook. Jim Carter (talk) 07:49, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Mogism's concern about the reliability of gomolo.com as a source is a valid one. However, after Jim Cartar's addition of new sources, gomolo is largely used as a secondary supporting source, and for the plot summary, which does not require references anyways, I think this is no longer an issue. However, the ultraindia.com link now produces a 404 error, and the Verma1999 book lacks an ISBN, which makes it hard to verify the book's existence (a google books search results in other books with similar names instead). These need be fixed. -Zanhe (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
- To replace ultraindia and Verma1999 I have added another source to support the statement. BTW Zanhe I can access ultraindia.com? Please try with another browser. And I have Verma1999 book but I can't find ISBN anywhere, Maybe because most of the Indian local books does not mention ISBN. Anyway, I have added another source; Now this two source will also work as a secondary supporting source. So please re-review, Zanhe. Thanks. Jim Carter (talk) 07:58, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- For some reason I still cannot access the ultraindia.com link (tried other browsers too), but it's probably a temporary issue. Thanks for adding another source. Judging by the multiple offline sources as well as the gomolo source which I can access, I'm now confident to say the hook is supported with inline sources. The article is new enough and long enough. Dup Detector reports no close paraphrasing. Good to go.
-Zanhe (talk) 08:39, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
- For some reason I still cannot access the ultraindia.com link (tried other browsers too), but it's probably a temporary issue. Thanks for adding another source. Judging by the multiple offline sources as well as the gomolo source which I can access, I'm now confident to say the hook is supported with inline sources. The article is new enough and long enough. Dup Detector reports no close paraphrasing. Good to go.
- @Jim Cartar: and @Zanhe: Sorry to be spoiler in your already approved DYK. But can the hook be changed to include "first film"? I have added multiple references to support the claim. (I wonder why it was difficult for you two to establish that Chopra was the film's producer.) Proposing ALT1 now.
- ALT1 ...
that the 1956 Hindi film Ek Hi Raasta was Dadasaheb Phalke Award winner B. R. Chopra's first film as producer? - I would have loved to include B. R. Films in the hook; but its a red link as of now. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Hmm. Good! the hook is now much interesting; I support this hook. Actually I'm very busy this days (real life) so I cannot dig out all those references. I know that this was his first produced film (According to IMBD) but as I said earlier I'm busy. Thanks Dharmadhyaksha for the help. I'm soon going to start an article on B. R. films but the above hook looks fine. Jim Carter (talk) 13:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
- Problem is, the new hook does not seem accurate. The source (Rishi2012) says his first film was Afsana, while Ek Hi Raasta was the first film of his own production company B. R. Films. -Zanhe (talk) 03:23, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
- Oh right Zanhe ... I missed that. So lets go with original hook or ALT2. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:21, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
- ALT2 ... that the 1956 Hindi film Ek Hi Raasta was Dadasaheb Phalke Award winner B. R. Chopra's first film as producer under his banner B. R. Films?