Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/M. V. Seetharamiah

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 23:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

M. V. Seetharamiah

(
)
  • ... that Kannada language author M. V. Seetharamiah established that Sri Vijaya was the author of the classic Kavirajamarga and not the Rashtrakuta emperor Nrupatunga? Source: [1]
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kauai_Plantation_Railway
    • Comment: Article is currently in a deletion discussion. But, it should be coming out good soon. The nomination for deletion was done on an earlier version that had major WP:COPYVIO violations and very poor sourcing as well as a poor overall structure. 5x expansion should be measured after removing the copyvio contents from the last version prior to WP:TNT expansion. In retrospect I could have just deleted that text before expanding which could have made this easier. But, hopefully the expansion can easily be seen. Thanks in advance. Also, I would have loved to use the image. But, I think the fair-use rationale precludes the image from being used on the homepage.

5x expanded by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 19:37, 27 August 2022 (UTC).

  • Comment: Seems to pass Earwig test. Checked two news sources in the article namely Deccan Herald, and The Hindu in archive org, article seems to pass notability test too. Over all it seems positive for further review of DYK . Calculating 5x is technical thing which other users can support with. Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 13:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Full review needed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:53, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, this doesn't look like it meets 5x. If we start from Special:Permalink/1105512383 (1316 readable prose) and measure to the current version (3994 readable prose), that's only 3.03x. It's sad because the pre-existing version was totally discarded (WP:TNT) and this is all new, but WP:DYKR is pretty clear about that not counting. I'd be happy to be shown that I'm either calculating wrong, or misinterpreting the rule, but pending either of those, I need to mark this as ineligible. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Greetings @RoySmith:. Happy to add my notes. If you check Special:Permalink/1105512383 you will see that it was entirely a WP:COPYVIO. Details can be seen here. The number of characters attributed to the copyvio is atleast 1046. So, the base length of the article subtracting for the copyvio text = 1316 - 1046 = 270. The article is currently at 3994. i.e. ~15x. With this, this article should be eligible for WP:DYKN. Specifically, quoting from WP:DYKR, Fivefold expansion means at least five times as much prose as the previously existing article, no matter how bad it was (copyvios are the only exception). Again, I agree that I could have kept it clean by deleting the copyvio text and creating a base version, that would have made it simple, but, we should be good otherwise too. Appreciate your attention at your convenience. Ktin (talk) 14:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
@Ktin:, Yeah, it would have been easier to see if there was a clean revision to start from, but your explanation makese sense. Thanks. I'll proceed with the rest of the review now. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Article is long enough (see above thread for 5x explanation) and new enough.
  • I don't see any copyvio problems with the current version.
  • No problems with WP:BLP or WP:NPOV.
  • References look good.
  • QPQ done.
  • I'm not sure the source for the hook is a WP:RS. If there's not a better source for that, them maybe something along the lines of:
    • ALT1: ... that M. V. Seetharamiah edited an important treatment of the grammar of old Kannada.
sourced to https://www.deccanherald.com/spectrum/the-mighty-pens-of-the-rebel-poets-1139135.html? -- RoySmith (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
Greetings @RoySmith:. Thanks for your patience. Shastriya Kannada is maintained by Centre of Excellence for Studies in Classical Kannada a body set up by India's Ministry of Human Resources Development and Government of Karnataka. It works as a part of Central Institute of Indian Languages and should be considered an authoritative subject on this topic. i.e. classical Kannada literature. Should be good to validate ALT0. Please let me know if I can help with any additional information. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 19:26, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
OK, I'll WP:AGF on the reliability of the source. Good to go now. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/M._V._Seetharamiah&oldid=1110850151"