Template:Did you know nominations/Jatindra Mohan Sengupta
- The following discussion 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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:13, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Jatindra Mohan Sengupta
[edit]- ... that Jatindra Mohan Sengupta, Indian freedom fighter is lovingly called Deshpriya (Beloved of the country)?
Created/expanded by Titodutta (talk), Presearch (talk), Abhidevananda (talk), Magioladitis (talk). Nominated by Titodutta (talk) at 10:38, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
New enough, long enough, spot-checks show no copyvios, and appears otherwise within policy. Hook is right length, and hook fact appears in text and is supported by inline citation. One paragraph lacked an inline citation but I added one. Also cited sources differ in whether they spell "beloved of the country" as "Deshpriya" versus with an extra "a" as in "Deshapriya." The spelling differed in the hook versus the article text that supported the hook. It seems to me that the spelling used in the hook should also appear where the hook is supported. Therefore I added both spellings as alternatives into the text. Given these two minor fixes, the hook now seems ready to go as a DYK item. -- Presearch (talk) 22:49, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
This article needs a copyedit before it is ready for the front page. There are problems ranging from typos (his death is given as 1923 in at least one place) to problematic phrasing, which also affects the hook. The hook is also too close a paraphrase of the postal source, which reads "who lovingly called him 'Deshpriya' (Beloved of the country)". (Note to Presearch: the two citations that support "Deshpriya" both use that spelling; if you wish to include "Deshapriya", you'll need a specific citation that uses this spelling, which I have removed as part of a sample copyedit of the final section because I didn't see it used.) BlueMoonset (talk) 19:01, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- NB: I've reinserted the 2nd (Deshapriya) spelling, now with an inline citation to the book mentioned below by Titodutta (which previously had been listed in "Further reading", but not inline). Unless my help is requested, I'll assume that others will handle copy editing and confirmation of its adequacy. Good luck -- Best regards -- Presearch (talk) 22:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Deshapriya is better romanization of Bengali, see this book. That means Beloved of the country. --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- I have corrected the year! --Tito Dutta (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Dear Tito, you have corrected one of the bad years. However, the problematic phrasing—significant prose issues—is still present, and you haven't addressed the hook issue at all. I don't understand why you would ask me to come back having made a single correction when so much more is needed. The article needs a thorough copyedit. Presearch, thanks for the source covering the other spelling. (Should it still be listed in the "Further reading" section if it's also a regular reference, both numbers 2 and 8? I'm not sure of the rules on that.) BlueMoonset (talk) 06:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset, you are correct with regard to the "Further reading" duplication. WP:FURTHER states that "The Further reading section should not duplicate the content of the External links section, and should normally not duplicate the content of the References section, unless the References section is too long for a reader to use as part of a general reading list." On reading that, my initial impulse was to remove the duplicate entry from "Further reading". But then I hesitated since that might bury (make harder to notice) the citation to an important book that readers should know about. So I defer to Titodutta to figure out, and perhaps implement, the best way to meet this guideline. If he prefers, I could simply delete the duplicate entry from "Further reading". -- Presearch (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- I performed a copyedit on the article. Regarding the duplicate reference - or almost duplicate reference - I also noticed it and decided to delete it.--Abhidevananda (talk) 15:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- I've just pulled myself and Mooonriddengirl out of the list of contributors: my contribution was quite minor and I don't want credit, and Moonriddengirl just did a simple move and should not be credited. I'll leave it to the other three as to whether they wish credit or not. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- I performed a copyedit on the article. Regarding the duplicate reference - or almost duplicate reference - I also noticed it and decided to delete it.--Abhidevananda (talk) 15:37, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- BlueMoonset, you are correct with regard to the "Further reading" duplication. WP:FURTHER states that "The Further reading section should not duplicate the content of the External links section, and should normally not duplicate the content of the References section, unless the References section is too long for a reader to use as part of a general reading list." On reading that, my initial impulse was to remove the duplicate entry from "Further reading". But then I hesitated since that might bury (make harder to notice) the citation to an important book that readers should know about. So I defer to Titodutta to figure out, and perhaps implement, the best way to meet this guideline. If he prefers, I could simply delete the duplicate entry from "Further reading". -- Presearch (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Dear Tito, you have corrected one of the bad years. However, the problematic phrasing—significant prose issues—is still present, and you haven't addressed the hook issue at all. I don't understand why you would ask me to come back having made a single correction when so much more is needed. The article needs a thorough copyedit. Presearch, thanks for the source covering the other spelling. (Should it still be listed in the "Further reading" section if it's also a regular reference, both numbers 2 and 8? I'm not sure of the rules on that.) BlueMoonset (talk) 06:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
New review needed to confirm that prose issues have been addressed. Suggesting a slight rewrite of the hook:
- ALT1: ... that freedom fighter Jatindra Mohan Sengupta of India is called Deshapriya (beloved of the country) by people of Bengal?
- You can decide whether to use the "Deshpriya" or "Deshapriya" spelling in the hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- Not really, Moonridengirl was doing the copyright investigation at that time, asked me to rewrite in temp page, reviewed the article after writing etc! --Tito Dutta (talk) 00:35, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- ALT1 looks good! Deshapriya please! --Tito Dutta (talk) 00:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- Deshapriya it is. If you feel strongly that Moonriddengirl should be included, then feel free to add her back in, but all I saw in the history was a single page move, and that's what I based my edit on. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- I added a fair-use portrait cropped and uploaded from an Indian commemmorative stamp. I edited the lead for clarity, and made a few other touchups. I also added Bengali people to the hook (above) per source description. Good to go. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 22:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
