Template:Did you know nominations/Palika Kendra
- 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) 11:45, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Palika Kendra
Palika Kendra building
- ... that the Palika Kendra (pictured) remained one of the tallest buildings in Delhi for many years after its construction? Palika Kendra ... had the distinction of being one of the tallest buildings in Delhi for many years
- ALT1:... that a grand wall mural of Mahatma Gandhi was unveiled on Palika Kendra (pictured) on his 150th birth anniversary? Naidu unveils wall mural of Mahatma Gandhi
- ALT2:... that the Palika Kendra (pictured) is one of the few buildings in Delhi that feature Brutalist architecture style? Delhi's Brutalism: Here are 11 historical structures we'll regret losing. Because, memories
- ALT3:... that the Palika Kendra (pictured) is the tallest building owned by the New Delhi Municipal Council? Palika Kendra is the tallest building owned by NDMC
- Reviewed: Canal Orbe 21
Created by Deepak G Goswami (talk). Self-nominated at 08:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC).
Article move to user space versus filing date okay. Article length okay. Neutrality and sourcing no problem, no evident signs of copyvio. Image licensing okay. QPQ done. Only hooks ALT0 and ALT2 have sufficient interest in my view. Both are okay in terms of length and neutrality and both have online sources. ALT0 links Delhi but ALT2 does not, not sure why. Also re ALT2 and the article text and source, it's not completely clear whether there were never a lot of Brutalist buildings in Delhi, or whether it's that only a few are still standing. Finally, the article text seems to have a few Indian English usages ('in the decade of 1970', 'Though the committee favourably agreed with ...' run-on sentence, 'Total 3,870 kulhars') that may seem off to Western readers. Wasted Time R (talk) 22:54, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Wasted Time R thanks for your review. ALT2 mentions that the concerned building is "one of the few buildings" in Delhi that feature Brutalist architecture and there were just never many structures with such architectural style. I have reworded it in the article, "the building remains among the few structures..". About the usage of Indian English, it's normal for Wikipedia articles related to Indian subjects to use the local variant and where it is completely off like using kulhar, I have provided wikilink. Regards.--Deepak G Goswami (talk) 11:31, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Deepak G Goswami: I work around a lot of Indians so there are some Indian English usages I know and like, such as 'do the needful' and 'upgradation'. But in particular I wasn't sure if the brief 'Total 3,870 kulhars, ...', instead of 'A total of 3,870 kulhars, ...', was an Indian English usage or just a mistake. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oh that was an oversight. Thank you for pointing out.--Deepak G Goswami (talk) 15:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I came by to promote this, and did a little editing for English grammar. Please check that I understood the text correctly. Please provide a source for the first sentence under Construction; the original citation didn't mention any of this at all. It's not clear that the second sentence is even talking about this tin shed; maybe some tweaking is needed here. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 19:44, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, it's mentioned under the "Interesting Anecdotes" section: "A small, tin shed cinema hall called 'Tipness' was built at the spot where the NDMC headquarter Palika Kendra now stands. The theatre was built to entertain the construction workers building the new capital". No, the second sentence is definitely not talking about the makeshift cinema hall. The cinema hall existed for a temporary period and a different building was built after replacing it which used to host the Town Hall of the NDMC and that too was demolished in the decade of 1970s to make a space for the construction of new building, the Palika Kendra. But I can understand how it may look confusing. Would a use of any adjective like "temporary" or "makeshift" before cinema hall make it more clear? Please change it accordingly. Regards--Deepak G Goswami (talk) 11:36, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Deepak G Goswami: yes, it looks like a little more explanation is needed there. After the sentence about the tin shed (please add the cite), you could add another sentence about the other buildings that stood on the site. Then the next sentence could talk about the building demolished to make room for the Palika Kendra. Yoninah (talk) 11:49, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, please take a look. I have tried to bring more clarity.--Deepak G Goswami (talk) 14:29, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oh that was an oversight. Thank you for pointing out.--Deepak G Goswami (talk) 15:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Deepak G Goswami: I work around a lot of Indians so there are some Indian English usages I know and like, such as 'do the needful' and 'upgradation'. But in particular I wasn't sure if the brief 'Total 3,870 kulhars, ...', instead of 'A total of 3,870 kulhars, ...', was an Indian English usage or just a mistake. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:59, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
