Template:Did you know nominations/Saura painting
The following is an archived discussion of Saura painting's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know
(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.
The result was: promoted by Miyagawa (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2013 (UTC).
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Saura painting
[edit]- ... that Saura painting of Odisha has a striking visual semblance to Warli painting from Maharashtra?
- Reviewed: Vajara
Created by Ashwin147 (talk). Self nominated at 03:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC).
New enough, long enough, sourcing looks good. I did not see any copyvio that was cause for concern. One phrase, "Verrier Elwin was the first scholar to study the Saura pictograms", is very close to "Verrier Elwin was the first to study the Saura pictograms" in the article, but it's such a basic statement using ordinary wording that I don't really see much cause for concern. Some would get antsy about this, but I'm not so worried. It's a nice article, well-written and sourcing looks good. Great job! What would make it even better would be an image, if you can find a good free-use image for the article. Mabalu (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm finding quite a few phrases that are identical or nearly so to their sources. Compare for example
- "Every occasion does not demand a new ekon and the existing one is regularly used" with "Every occasion does not demand a new ekon and the existing one is regularly used", or "Ekons are today drawn by artists but traditionally it was the preserve of the Kudangs, the priestly class among the Sauras, who also had the expertise to explain their meaning to the Saura villagers. The ekons thus served also as a part of the vocal tradition that linked the Sauras with their customs and traditions" with "These days artists draw ekons but customarily it was only the Kudangs, or the community of priests among the Sauras, who were qualified to do ekons. These men had the expertise to explain their meaning to village gatherings and the ekon thus was looked at as a valuable feature of a vocal tradition through which the Sauras connected with their customs", or "Traditionally, Saura paintings were executed on the mud walls of the Sauras’ huts. The background is prepared from red or yellow ochre earth and tender bamboo shoots with their tip mashed into a brush like cluster of fibres" with "Traditional Saura paintings were done on mud walls of huts. The background was prepared with red or yellow ochre earth. Tribals used tender bamboo shoots, mashing the tip into a brush like a cluster of fibres". Nikkimaria (talk) 01:49, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, completely unintentional and unconscious! Have now reworked the whole thing. See if it works. And if we can still run the hook. Else, feel free to change. I'll be off Wikipedia for a fortnight now. Thanks. Ashwin147 (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Reading more carefully: I don't see anything about symbiotic pregnancy in the reference at the end of that paragraph. (everything else is supported). Please reference each individual sentence where possible rather than putting all references at the end of a paragraph - it makes verification much easier. Also, and this struck me this time round too: why does the deity appear as Idital in the article when his name is Edital in some of the sources? Generally the rewrite looks better. Mabalu (talk) 15:48, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- It is better, but still seeing some problematic passages - compare for example "The influence of markets and increasing awareness about the other’s forms have led to both Saura and Warli paintings picking up each other's nuances" with "market-driven customs and more awareness about other forms, have seen both Saura and Warli picking up each other's nuances". Nikkimaria (talk) 01:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- Well, last heading. Have changed those too. Ashwin147 (talk) 06:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Let's get another opinion on the fixes. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:48, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
It's nearly there, but this quote "and have increasingly been used to decorate items like T-shirts and diaries for middle class consumption" isn't backed up by the source provided in the inline citation. The t-shirts are, but the diaries and the middle class consumption are not.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 15:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Edited out. I had seen the reference to the diary somewhere. The items of middle class consumption was my summary for that inventory of items they produce in the quote in the source. The new edit solves any ambiguities on that front. Ashwin147 (talk) 17:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
