Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Phoolan Devi/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by David Fuchs via FACBot (talk) 18 November 2023 [1].

Phoolan Devi

[edit]
Nominator(s): Mujinga (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Phoolan Devi (1963 – 2001), also known as the Bandit Queen, had a rather unique life. She went from a very poor rural beginning in Uttar Pradesh to being a notorious dacoit (bandit). Her fame grew amongst the lower castes in India whilst she was on the run since she was seen as a Robin Hood figure; she was also involved (to at least some degree) in the Behmai massacre. She negotiated her surrender to the authorities and spent eleven years in prison. Her charges were dropped so she could become an MP in the Lok Sabha, the lower house of India's Parliament, then she was shot to death whilst incumbent. It's quite a story, made more colourful by her tendency to change how she recounted the events of her life to suit different situations. The film Bandit Queen made her globally famous although she herself objected to her depiction and at first wanted it banned in India. This article was improved by a helpful review at GA (by @Larataguera:) and useful comments at PR from (@Alanna the Brave:, @SusunW: and @BennyOnTheLoose:). A note on naming conventions - after several discussions it was decided to refer to her consistently as Phoolan Devi. All constructive comments welcome! Mujinga (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from AK

[edit]
Collapsed comments


  • "sexually abused repeatedly" Didn't this happen after her marriage? Actually, this entire sentence is nonsensical; her marriage and the kidnapping (which was followed by sexual abuse) are separate incidents and mentioning them together portrays them as clearly leading to each other. You should have one sentence about her marriage and maybe later troubles, and then another about her kidnapping and how it eventually led to her joining the dacoits.
    she was sexually abused by (at least) Puttilal, the second son of the village leader, the police (probably), Babu Gujjar, Shri Ram Singh and the Behmai Thakurs Mujinga (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    All of those were still after marriage (as opposed to current phrasing, which implies some occurred before marriage), and none of those are directly related to her joining the dacoits, which is also implied by the current phrasing.
    I see what you mean, I think, so I've switched the two things around to make " After being married off at the age of eleven and being sexually abused by various people, she joined a dacoit group." Mujinga (talk) 07:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "without facing trial" Wasn't she awaiting trial? This isn't clear in the body either, see below.
    i'm glad you are reading the body, since I always read the lead lasty after the reading the article. she didn't face a trial in 11 years Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But she was awaiting trial, right? So shouldn't that be mentioned?
    the sentence is " spent eleven years in Gwalior prison, without facing trial", would you prefer " spent eleven years in Gwalior prison, awaiting trial."? I don't see much difference to be honest Mujinga (talk) 07:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The former implies some sort of arbitrary detention; the other implies that she was just awaiting trial.
    I'm not sure if I agree with that rationale, but added "awaiting" if its clearer than facing Mujinga (talk) 08:41, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Moxham reported that she then renounced Buddhism" When, immediately after converting? Why?
    sources are a bit of a mess here...
    Arquilla says "She had become a Buddhist "to escape the perpetual damnation of the Hindu caste system"" based on Cuny, and Rambali, The Bandit Queen of India, viii.
    Moxham says: "earlier in the month Phoolan had decided to convert to Buddhism" and "Phoolan had now decided not to convert to Buddhism"
    ToI says "slain samajwadi party mp phoolan devi and her husband ummed singh had embraced buddhism at the famous "deekshabhoomi" here, according to former general secretary of all india buddhist conference (aibc) dr bhalchandra khandekar." Mujinga (talk) 08:44, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't any of the sources provide a timeline for when she renounced it? AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    nope Mujinga (talk) 07:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "caused them many problems" What problems? Presumably financial hardship, so mention it.
    this summarises "Phoolan Devi's uncle and his son (her cousin) stole land from her father ... Her family was compelled to live in a small house on the edge of the village; the uncle and son continued to harass the family and to steal their crops, aiming to drive them away from the village ... Maiyadin ordered her to leave, and when she did not, he beat her into unconsciousness; the village leader then decreed that her parents should also be beaten ... Phoolan Devi's mother told The Asian Age that she was still fighting to regain the land which Maiyadin had stolen from the family ... Maiyadin pressured the family to ask Puttilali to take her back ... In January 1979, Maiyadin destroyed the family's crops and began to chop down a neem tree on their land. When Phoolan Devi threw stones at him and wounded his face, she was arrested by the local police and detained for one month" etc Mujinga (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Stop quoting the article as a reply, I read the article already. I'm saying mention what kinds of problems (eg financial hardships) were caused in the lead.
    we need to have common ground to discuss on, not someone saying IDONTLIKEIT. I'd say "many problems" summarises the issues much better than "financial hardship", if you look at the various things that happened. also would you mind signing your posts please? it would make replying easier Mujinga (talk) 07:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Man Singh" Again, who is this?
    sentence reads "Phoolan Devi managed to escape and formed another gang with Man Singh" - I could say "the bandit Man Singh" but is that not obvious? Mujinga (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But how did Phoolan Devi know him? Was a previous acquaintance or just some random bandit she happened to meet? AryKun (talk) 09:19, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a bit complicated. According to Sen's account, Phoolan Devi went to see the gang leader Mustaqeem and Man Singh was part of that gang. She wanted to join Mustaqeem's gang but Mustaqeem didn't want a woman in his gang so it caused tensions. Man Singh became attracted to her, she rebuffed him, then she realised after months she couldn't stay in Mustaqeem's gang so she asked Man Singh to form a gang with her, he was at first cold then decided to break away with her. Mustaqeem endorsed their decision. Mujinga (talk) 08:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Someone else (GRuban) also flagged this up so I've changed it up Mujinga (talk) 12:37, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "by order of the central government of Mulayam Singh Yadav" You probably mean state government, MSY has never led a government at the Centre. Also, you need to explain why this happened; MSY's government was in power in UP, and Devi was incarcerated in MP.
    source only says "In 1994, the government of Mulayam Singh Yadav, leader of the Other Backward Castes, withdrew criminal cases against her" - I haven't been able to find more info in english language sources Mujinga (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She was...Shobhawati Devi." Irrelevant.
    sentence reads "She was not the only illiterate MP, joining others such as Bhagwati Devi and Shobhawati Devi" - this seems like useful info to me, thinking in terms of the general reader Mujinga (talk) 17:02, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    How is this useful? It's trivia. You don't even mention her literacy anywhere earlier in the article, because it's irrelevant.
    growing up illiterate in rural India is not uncommon, to become an illiterate MP is Mujinga (talk) 08:12, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, plenty of illiterate MPs, as illustrated by the other examples you cite; more importantly, you don't mention her literacy anywhere earlier, so this just seems like a random factoid. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "The family was illiterate" is mentioned earlier; the source here only mentions Bhagwati Devi and Shobhawati Devi Mujinga (talk) 08:07, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "politician, who became a Member of Parliament before being assassinated" would be better as "politician who served as a Member of Parliament from Mirzapur". We can mention her assassination later in the lead, it isn't a defining characteristic of her or something that is super-widely known.
    i would disagree her assassination is not a defining characteristic Mujinga (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Isn't a defining characteristic, the defining characteristic is her dacoity.
    for me the definining characteristics of Phoolan Devi are outlaw / MP / worldwide fame / assassination Mujinga (talk) 08:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC

'* "the river" Indefinite article or mention the exact river.

  • "one Other Backward Class" OBC isn't a caste, it's a administrative grouping.
    this came up at PR, the source uses OBC Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Then might have to be rephrased, no-one uses OBC as a singular noun as currently done in the article. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure. It's been really hard to get advice on naming conventions for this article, happy for any constructive comments on this point. The source says "A total of 20 persons, including 17 Thakurs, one Muslim, one Dalit and one belonging to the OBC". So shall we say "one person from the Other Backward Class"? Whilst we are on the subject, is the later statement "she was generally popular among Other Backward Classes" working for you? Mujinga (talk) 08:20, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "given land with their goat and cow" Implies they already had a goat and cow?
    The quote in The Atlantic reads: "My other conditions were that all my cases be tried together in Madhya Pradesh in special courts; that the land that was my father's and was stolen by my cousin be rightfully returned to him; that my brother [he was then fourteen] be given a government job; that my family be resettled in Madhya Pradesh, on government land; and that they be accompanied by my goat and cow." Mujinga (talk) 17:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Then clarify that it's "her" goat, not "their" goat.
    ok Mujinga (talk) 08:49, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "from the Mallah...Shudra varna" Overexplaining, the audience most likely to read this article (Indians) already know what caste is. We wouldn't have an explanation of Jim Crow laws in an article about a Black American from the 1940s.
    Yeah this is going to be contentious and has already been discussed/edited several times. Since WP:INDIA has been invited twice to look over the article and several active members made edits, I assume the current version is OK, but .. happy to hear other opinions. I just want the article to be accurate. I disagree with "the audience most likely to read this article (Indians)" - if this article is featured on the front page of english wikipedia I'd hope people from all over the world will see it. Having said that, I'm ofc open to improving the article Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The one front page appearance this may have aside, the vast majority of readers will know the obvious things we're explaining; just say that Mallahs are Shudras, and let the hyperlinks explain the rest for people who don't know what the caste system is (also, I think pretty much everyone at least knows this, even in the West). AryKun (talk) 16:56, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I am far from being an expert on this topic of caste and this has already been rewritten by others who presumably know more than me, so hopefully other people can reply as well to help improve this sentence Mujinga (talk) 08:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Wikipedia is written for a global audience and we can't assume that the reader knows what the caste system is. (t · c) buidhe 18:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At the...criminal charges." How is this worth mentioning in the lead? You don't even mention the SC setting aside the dismissal of the charges before this.
    i'm summarising the article? Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But you don't mention the charges being reinstitute earlier, while you do mention them being set aside; to someone who just read the lead, these charges are reappearing out of nowhere. Also, if she died unexpectedly, wouldn't it be obvious that the charges hadn't been dealt with before her death?
    for me the lead reads ok since she surrendered, she awaited trial (on charges), the charges were dropped and at the time she died the charges had been reinstituted. that chrononology works for me Mujinga (talk) 08:28, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mentioning India in her birthplace is pointing out the obvious, just Uttar Pradesh is enough.
But it is so obvious as to be pointless; you wouldn't insert "George Walker Bush was born in New Haven, Connecticut, United States" to that article, would you? AryKun (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No probably not, but it's a different case Mujinga (talk) 08:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Again, an unnecessarily Western-centric perspective. AryKun (talk) 09:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are you seriously trying to tell me that a US former president and Phoolan Devi are comparable in stature? Mujinga (talk) 07:56, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Some other random white people we don't mention the country for (one of them's French, so it isn't just because we're the English Wikipedia either). AryKun (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That seems pretty WP:OSE. We can't assume that the reader knows the names of different states in India. (t · c) buidhe 18:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But we can expect them to know where Wyoming or New South Wales is? In any case, OSE is about deletion discussions; for content, “we do this in all our other articles” is a perfectly valid for consistency. I’d say this is exactly the kind of thing SYSTEMICBIAS is about; even on an article primarily of interest to Indians, we’re assuming the reader knows nothing about India, when we wouldn’t make this assumption for an article about a person from the Anglosphere, as shown in the random FAs above. AryKun (talk) 02:16, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There seem to be a few things going on here. As I understand it, (1) your rationale here AryKun is that it is systemically biased to say Uttar Pradesh is in India in the body since most readers will be Indian and will already know this fact. In support of your rationale, (2) you give some other FAs which don't use the country on first mention of location in the body. Further, (3) I take it you are also saying since we already know Phoolan Devi is Indian, it's overkill to say she was born in India, but that's a stylistic point and I might be wrong there.
On point 1, the way I see the systemic bias is the other way round, wikipedia editors assume we all know where New York is for example. Yes Indian readers know UP is in India, but on a global perspective I'd say most readers won't. I would argue one way to counter systemic bias is to have more FAs about things and people from different cultures than Western Europe and Northern America, so having Phoolan Devi on the frontpage is working towards that. We both want to improve the article I hope, so then it's finding the middle ground to move forward.
On points 2 and3, for me I prefer to write the lead summarising everything in the body so that if someone skips the summary they still get all the cited info. I don't know if it necessarily helps to look at specific examples you gave or not, I can though:
  • "George Walker Bush was born on July 6, 1946, at Grace-New Haven Hospital in New Haven, Connecticut" - since he is a former US president I'm not sure if US needs stating.
  • "Roger Aubrey Baskerville Mynors was born in Langley Burrell, Wiltshire,[2] on 28 July 1903 into a family of Herefordshire gentry.[3] " - I'd say adding England or southern England after Wiltshire would be helpful
  • "Lemoine was born in Quimper, Finistère, on 22 November 1840, the son of a retired military captain who had participated in the campaigns of the First French Empire occurring after 1807. " - since the French Empire is mentioned I don't think we need France here
  • "Philip Hoffman was born on July 23, 1967, in the Rochester suburb of Fairport, New York." - NY is generally agreed by convention to be commonly known enough not to need a country identifier. Is that in itself systemically biased? Well that's another question.
  • "Stephen Russell Davies was born on 27 April 1963 at Mount Pleasant Hospital in Swansea." - I'd say adding Wales would be helpful
  • "Tolliver grew up in Boyd, Texas, where he attended local schools." - I'm on the fence if Texas needs geolocating here
To give some of my own examples from FAs which do identify by country in the body:
  • Olive Morris was born on 26 June 1952 in Harewood, St Catherine, Jamaica.
  • Mary [Queen of Scots] was born on 8 December 1542 at Linlithgow Palace, Scotland, to King James V and his French second wife, Mary of Guise.
  • Emma Goldman was born into an Orthodox Jewish family in Kovno in Lithuania, then within the Russian Empire.
  • Ella Marija Lani Yelich-O'Connor [Lorde]was born on 7 November 1996 in Takapuna, New Zealand, a suburb of Auckland, to poet Sonja Yelich (Croatian: Jelić) and civil engineer Vic O'Connor.
I personally don't think everyone reading wikipedia knows where UP is, but I'm from Europe so that's my perspective, which might well be institutionally biased. On the other hand, wikipedia has a global audience so just as we shouldn't be writing articles about North American people from a North American perspective, we shouldn't be writing articles about people from India from an Indian perspective. This says nothing about your particular point of view by the way, I'm trying not to assume very much about that. Mujinga (talk) 13:25, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Phoolan Devi...Party in 1996" I shuddered reading that comma splice, would be better as "After the charges against her were set aside in 1994, Phoolan Devi was released from prison and joined politics, standing as a Member of Parliament as a member of the Samjwadi Party in 1996".
    I prefer my version, happy to hear other opinions Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm pretty sure it has a comma splice; it also reads a bit overly rushed, like someone's just trying to get their thoughts out. AryKun (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "worldwide fame" seems peacock-y, maybe "fame outside India".
    this summarises "Phoolan Devi's fame throughout India continued to grow after her death, and the controversy surrounding the Bandit Queen film had already ensured that she was globally famous; she has become a legendary figure, alongside other outlaws such as Ned Kelly, Sándor Rózsa and Pancho Villa" Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But it sounds kind of peacock-y in wikivoice, at least to me. AryKun (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd be happy to rephrase, still trying to work out a good way of saying this. Her fame is unusual Mujinga (talk) 08:29, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm just going to oppose this right now. There are just too many issues here. Just going to note a couple points below where there may be factual, DUE, or comprehensiveness issues.
    oh that's a shame, hopefully we can get there! i've been able to answer/reply on the above in ten minutes Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No offense, but you haven't actually addressed any of the substantive comments, just the minor prose and grammar related issues. The actual comprehensiveness and DUE issues still remain unaddressed, or have replies that are just quotes from the article I just read. AryKun (talk) 17:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to say I am a bit baffled by that reply, could you be more specific so we can improve the article collaboratively? Mujinga (talk) 07:57, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tributes were...Janata Dal." Irrelevant, this is more or less every party in UP with a lower caste base of support. AryKun (talk) 15:25, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    irrelevant to you perhaps but worth including for the general reader? Mujinga (talk) 17:05, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Your hypothetical general reader is too Western-centric and apparently has no knowledge of India; like I said, this just pointless platitudes (two of the parties delivering the platitudes aren't even electorally relevant in UP), and UNDUE in this article.
    I don't doubt that you have more knowledge about India generally than I do, but your rationale here doesn't persuade me that the article would be improved by removing this sentence Mujinga (talk) 08:14, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is politicians being politicians and doesn't really strike me as important enough to mention here. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    For comparison, imagine a Representative in the US saying some civil rights activist was a pretty great person while campaigning in a majority-Black area; it's just fishing for votes and not noteworthy enough to be in the article. AryKun (talk) 15:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    this comes back to the discussion of systemic bias we had earlier - I appreciate you know more about Indian politics than I do but for a global perspective I think the article gains more from having this included than it excluded Mujinga (talk) 20:41, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not about bias or anything, I just don't think politicians fishing for votes 20 years after her death is notable enough to mention in the article. Even the source you're using says "Though neither Tejashwi nor Paswan have indicated that their parties may contest the upcoming Assembly elections in UP", since these two parties aren't even particularly important. AryKun (talk) 07:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It still seems worth mentioning to me that tributes were made. If the politicians in question weren't going to contest elections then it seems it wasn't just about vote-grabbing Mujinga (talk) 11:42, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The photo of the dung cakes now strikes me as undue; since using dung cakes for fuel is a common thing to do, I don't think we should have a photo of the dung cakes, which makes it feel like it's something highly unusual and indicative of their poverty for people unfamiliar with the region. AryKun (talk) 05:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    well again, would it improve the article to remove the picture? it's quite hard to illustrate it Mujinga (talk) 07:55, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe put in a photo of a pearl millet field; dung has negative connotations and putting a photo of dung cakes would probably make non-locals think that it was because of their poverty, when it's actually because dung is just a common fuel source in the region. AryKun (talk) 13:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I did check out images of millet and chickpea fields previously (and just did again) - I'm not really finding an appropriate image unfortuately. I find it fascinating we seem to have very different views on what systemic bias means here. Could it be resolved by finding a source to back saying that dung is commonly used as a fuel? I just checked the Sen and Moxham but they don't say anything along those lines. Mujinga (talk) 08:59, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure; this seems like an appropriate contemporary-ish source. AryKun (talk) 09:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks I've accessed this through the wikipedia library and will give it a read Mujinga (talk) 13:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    expanded slightly Mujinga (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Image review

[edit]
  • File:Phoolan_Devi-Bandit_Queen.jpg needs a more expansive FUR
Thanks Nikkimaria, I'll look into both of these issues Mujinga (talk) 07:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria Hopefully these issues have been resolved. Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One remaining issue with File:Non-free_picture_of_Phoolan_Devi.jpg. The "respect for commercial opportunities" field is meant to explain why this usage does not replace the original market role of the work; the current parameter does not explicitly do this, it only explains what that role was. If that can be tweaked a bit this should be good to go. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added "This copy is of sufficient resolution for commentary and identification but too low resolution for commercial use. Copies made from it will be of inferior quality, unsuitable as artwork on pirate versions or other uses that would compete with the commercial purpose of the original artwork." Mujinga (talk) 20:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Choliamb

[edit]

The Legacy section of the article currently states that Phoolan Devi: The Bandit Queen, the opera by Shirish Korde and Lynn Kremer, had its premiere at the University of Boston in April 2010. The source cited for this statement is incorrect: the premiere actually took place at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, on April 15, 2010, a week before the production moved to Boston. See my comment (with sources) on the article's talk page. – 14:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

many thanks @Choliamb: for pointing this out, I'll look into now Mujinga (talk) 16:59, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
resolved Mujinga (talk) 08:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]
  • spotchecks not done
  • Footnote 2: how can this be dated 1991 if the edition is 1995?
  • Be consistent in how publication locations are formatted
  • FN8 is missing page numbers
  • Fn11 is missing author
  • Pugazhendhi is missing publisher and location
  • What makes The Times of India a high-quality reliable source? See WP:RSP
  • FN2 is published 1991, revised and updated 1995
  • I've gone through and hopefully fixed that issue
  • Why US in FN5 but not FN4?
  • FN8 - looking into this so not done yet
  • FN11 - good spot! added
  • "Pugazhendhi, N. (1984). Phoolan Devi (in Tamil)" is all I've got. Should I remove it?
  • Yes, per WP:TOI "The Times of India is considered to have a reliability between no consensus and generally unreliable". I've used it seven times, I would say as a news source for an Indian citizen it seems ok - is there any instance that seems unreliable? Most uses also have other cites, this one is standing on its own - "Munni Devi again claimed in 2018 that Devi had been murdered on the order of Umed Singh and argued that Sher Singh Rana had been framed by a government conspiracy". Happy to chop that one out?
  • FN46 typo fixed
Mujinga (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ultimately if a source is classed between no consensus and generally unreliable, you're going to need a strong argument to support it being considered high-quality for our purposes, and I'm not seeing that here. You say it seems ok - is there something in particular you're basing that on, other than that we're not relying heavily on it? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, I'll go through the ToI refs in the article now - what I meant was that an Indian newspaper covering an Indian person seems "matter-of-fact reporting" to me, but I appreciate you could reply that ToI is "generally unreliable for factual reporting on any topic with political ramifications". Mujinga (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    All ToI links chopped or replaced Mujinga (talk) 19:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nikkimaria could you take another look please. I'm hoping that both image and source review are a pass, please note I have added a few more sources. Thanks, Mujinga (talk) 12:00, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Images are fine. On sources, looks like there's still a Times ref present. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry which one are you talking about? Mujinga (talk) 11:20, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FN33. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:03, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note

[edit]

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild

[edit]

Recusing to review.

Ok. Could you ping me when you have a decision. Possibly duck the issue entirely? Eg 'and one other person'.
Ok.
changed to Ary Kun's suggestion
  • "and had to shoot her way out." No she didn't, eg she could have surrendered. Please rephrase in encyclopedic language.
    agreed, rejigged Mujinga (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and still armed with a Mauser rifle". Why "still"?
    it was a condition of her surrender she remained armed in case of any hijinks - this was unusual in that she was surrendering herself but stayed armed, so she was still armed with the rifle rather than surrendering it (if that makes sense) Mujinga (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That makes perfect sense, but if you are to use the word "still", a summary of that needs to precede its use in the article.
I've removed it now Mujinga (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • The first paragraph of "In culture" may work better in the previous section. If only to avoid having readers wondering what her religious conversions and lapses have to do with culture.
    previous section is "political career" but I like your suggestion below to rename the section, so moved Mujinga (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She dictated her autobigraphy I, Phoolan Devi". Is it known when?
    I don't have the book to hand right now, but we do it was published in 1996 so I think between 1994 and 1996. Mujinga (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article reads "Phoolan Devi received £40,000 from Channel 4 and dropped the complaint. She then dictated her autobigraphy". I assume the date she received the £40,000 and the date of publication are known, so you have your range for the dictation; could this be included in the article?
done Mujinga (talk) 15:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to be clear: the source states that Sher Singh Rana "claimed he had shot at Phoolan Devi", yes?
    I obviously have failed to communicate the central point here which is that the police didn't believe him when he surrendered himself to justice and said he was the assassin. I'll go back to the source and rephrase Mujinga (talk) 17:40, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    archive.org isn't working for me right now so i'll have to come back on this Mujinga (talk) 17:47, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    rejigged, hopefully clearer now Mujinga (talk) 16:07, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Rana ... struggled to convince police that he was present at the scene of the crime". Is it known why he would want to?
Just checking that you have seen this.
I think this is resolved by the clarification that he surrendered but let me know if you need more Mujinga (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Ok. (Maybe 'prior to'?)
sure! Mujinga (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You need to comply with the MoS. If you would like me to copy edit the offending phrases into compliance, let me know.
yes, please do! Mujinga (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done.
  • The section "In culture" is not a summary of Phoolan Devi in culture, but almost entirely about one film. Consider renaming it "Bandit Queen film".
    great suggestion! naming this section has been tricky and that works :) Mujinga (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In Unnao and Varanasi, the local authorities blocked the installation of the statues." What happened in the other 16 districts?
    interesting question, I'm now deep in the research Mujinga (talk) 16:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It was quite the political kerfuffle, no statues were installed but the proposers retaliated by offering 50,000 small idols of Phoolan Devi, so rejigged, thanks for the prod to look deeper Mujinga (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tributes were paid to her by Akhilesh Yadav of the Samajwadi Party, Chirag Paswan of the Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) and Tejashwi Yadav of Rashtriya Janata Dal." When?
    2021, added Mujinga (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Selected works": the book title should be in title case.
    I've consistently used "Bandit Queen" as a capitalised name throughout the article, so I'd rather keep it here as well Mujinga (talk) 16:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've tweaked it. Let me know if it's an issue.
ah now I understand, thanks!

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some responses to responses. This is ticking along nicely. Ping me when when you're ready for me to have another look. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
will do! Mujinga (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild I think I've replied on everything now, thanks for the suggestions! Mujinga (talk) 16:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good going. I will now reread the whole article to see what further nits I can find to pick at. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will do a little copy editing as I go. Let me know here if you disagree with anything, don't understand something, or I get something wrong. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the edits! I would only query whether it's correct to say "member of parliament (MP) for Mirzapur in Uttar Pradesh" instead of "Member of Parliament (MP) for Mirzapur in Uttar Pradesh" since I thought it was capitalised when the constituency is given, as for example in Caroline Lucas - "has been the Member of Parliament (MP) for Brighton Pavilion since the 2010 general election." Mujinga (talk) 12:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Take 2
[edit]
  • "When the two men could not be found". What two men?
  • "She was celebrated among Dalits for ..." Could we have a brief explanation of what a Dalit is.
  • "Phoolan Devi was charged ... twenty-two murders". You say earlier that only 20 people died.
  • "two Nishad parties laid claim to Phoolan Devi's legacy". Political parties? If so, perhaps insert 'political'.

And that's all I have. Great work. (What's next?) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • The two men are " Sri Ram Singh and his brother", with the whole bit reading "She returned to Behmai with her gang on 14 February 1981; speaking through a loudhailer, she demanded that the villagers hand over Sri Ram Singh and his brother, then the bandits went from house to house looting valuables.[2]: 150–151 [17]: 324  When the two men could not be found, twenty-two Thakur men were lined up at the Yamuna river and shot from behind". I think that's clear enough as is?
  • Writing about anything related to caste seems fraught with difficulties, so I've tried and anyone is welcome to improve
  • Hmm yes that's a good point. Sen says: "She is charged with 48 major criminal offences, including 22 murder charges, kidnaps-for-ransom and the looting of villages throughout the area" and I would have said that it must be the 20 Behmai murders and two carried out elsewhere, but in the next sentence Sen says "More specifically, she is accused of killing 22 high-caste Hindu men from Behmai, a remote hamlet that few have heard of, just south of Delhi." So it seems Sen has wrongly written 22 instead of 20. I'll have to check for other sources on this to confirm.
  • Added "political" Mujinga (talk) 13:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gog the Mild There does seem to be confusion in the soources between there being 22 and 20 deaths at Behmai, although there is general agreement that she was charged with 48 crimes total, so I've cropped it to "48 crimes, which included kidnapping, looting and murder".
    Re what's next, nothing springs to mind unfortunately! Perhaps another heist, but I think I'd prefer to concentrate on increasing the representation of women at FAC. Mujinga (talk) 13:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indira Gandhi needs work. :-) Gog the Mild (talk) 16:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comment

[edit]

BennyOnTheLoose

[edit]

I'll try and have a proper look over the next few days, but I don't think I'll have much to say. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:34, 27 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BennyOnTheLoose I hope you don't mind me giving you a prod on this? Mujinga (talk) 17:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not at all, thanks. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Couple of instances of "Devi" rather than "Phoolan Devi": in Behmai massacre, Surrender, Political career (x2), caption for the Biswas image, Assassination (x2), Legacy (x2). Please check whether these should be amended.
    Cheers that's very helpful. I have doublechecked and I think I've got them all now Mujinga (talk) 19:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • who became a member of parliament before being assassinated - I quite often see statements about people doing things before they died (rather than afterwards). Consider rewording, but no objection if you decide to retain this form.
    haha it does make me laugh when you put it like that :) I'll change to Kavyansh.Singh's suggestion Mujinga (talk) 19:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Since the Mallah subcaste forms part of the Nishad caste, two Nishad political parties laid claim to Phoolan Devi's legacy" - maybe reword as the two parties laying claim doesn't necessarily follow?
    true, rephrased Mujinga (talk) 19:46, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are varying accounts of her life because she told differing versions of events in her life. - maybe reword to avoid using "life" twice?
    thanks for noticing that, it seems as points are discussed and new edits are made, new errors creep in! hopefully we'll get there soon. cheers for the comments :@BennyOnTheLoose Mujinga (talk) 19:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mujinga, have you addressed Benny's comments? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
just seeing them now, thanks for the return prod! Mujinga (talk) 15:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Mujinga and BennyOnTheLoose: and also Gog the Mild, who read this section; please have a look at the instructions at WP:FAC. The {{tq}} template should not be used at FAC, as it slows down the whole page. I've switched a few of them, but please review throughout, as right now these templates are rendering the entire FAC page not accessible to all, which slows down reviews. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
seems to be ok now, thanks to whoever sorted it! Mujinga (talk) 15:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support: the article has moved on a bit since I last looked, and I have nothing else to suggest. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 14:33, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Dwaipayan

[edit]

I have not read the full article yet. It seems to me the prose is not up yo the mark. I did a mild copyedit, only a couple of paragraphs. The article likely needs copyediting by some experienced editor.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately Gog the Mild has just completed their copy edit! Any other comments welcomed, I've added the year where you asked and if you wanted to improve this edit about Dalits please feel free Mujinga (talk) 13:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was a reviewer's copy edit rather than, say, what I would have done if I had picked it up at GoCE. So where possible I went with the existing text. That said, for me it now gets over the "prose is engaging and of a professional standard" bar. Of course, other points of view are available. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comment Gog and thanks for the edits Dwaipayan, I've made some edits in turn Mujinga (talk) 10:35, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Kavyansh

[edit]
  • who became a member of parliament before being assassinated. — Of-course you can't become MP after being assassinated. It may be just me, but this phrasing seems a bit odd. The way we put it, it seemingly implies that she was assassinated just after a few days in office (like the case with William Goebel). Would it be an improvement if we say something like, "who served as a member of parliament until her assassination"? There may be more better ways to put it, I am by no means an "expert" on prose, but, its just my opinion ...
    it's good point, also made by BennyOnTheLoose above and I'll change to your suggestion Mujinga (talk) 19:40, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not a deal-breaker for me, but do we really need the state of in "a village in the state of Uttar Pradesh". We have already linked UP.
    I think it's doing more help than harm there, although I'm also not fussed if you want to change it Mujinga (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • After this massacre the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh resigned — My reading of MOS:JOBTITLE suggests that 'chief minister' should not be capitalized. Check for other instances of the same throughout the article.
    Yes it seems during the course of the review there have been various opinions on this, so it needs standardising again. I'll try to make it Chief Minister when a title and chief minister when a description, which is how I'm reading JOBTITLE Mujinga (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • and being sexually abused by various people — by various men, I guess.
    since everything is so vague on this point, I'd prefer to keep "people" although I take your point it probably was all men Mujinga (talk) 20:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess we have a bit of inconsistency with the usage of Oxford comma. her family grew chickpeas, sunflowers and pearl millet. v. offered 100 Indian rupees (equivalent to ₹400 or £4.20 in 2023), a cow, and a bicycle to her parents. v. places such as Devariya, Kanpur, and Orai. v. kidnapping, looting and murder. Kindly check for the entire article.
    I've standardised to no oxford commma Mujinga (talk) 12:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The standard practice in Biographical articles is that after introducing the subject, they are referred by their surname in the text. That, however, is not an absolute requirement, and only thing we look for is consistency. I see that for most of the article, we have referred to the subject by her complete name "Phoolan Devi". Exceptions to this are Instead, her mother sent Devi to stay with a distant relative. Same goes with 'Mala Sen'. We have already introduced her in the third para of early life, and for much of the text, she has been referred by her last name. In the last para of early life, however, we have Mala Sen asked her if she had been raped, again repeating her full name. Kindly check this for the entire article, and do let me know if I am misinterpreting something.
    Regarding Phoolan Devi, there's been quite a lengthy debate on the naming convention and we've settled on using her whole name, so thanks for pointing out there were a few "Devis". Regarding Mala Sen, it's a different issue in that the name "Sen" seems to me rather confusing unless it is clear that we are referring to Mala Sen, so I've used "Mala Sen" when mentioning her again and "Sen" when she has just been mentioned, I hope that makes sense. It certainly isn't standard practice but I think if I only used the full name on first mention, it would be confusing. Not particularly stuck on this rationale though. Mujinga (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • beside the Yamuna river — 'r' in river should be capitalized, I guess.
    done Mujinga (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The director of the Women's Feature Service — Shouldn't we mention their name as well?
    not sure here, the director is/was Anita Anand, who is neither Anita Anand nor Anita Anand (journalist) Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Phoolan Devi was charged in absentia with — We haven't italicized the term in the lead
    done Mujinga (talk) 20:30, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • then prostrated herself in front of Arjun Singh, Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, with 8,000 people watching — check for JOBTITLE, and with 8,000 people watching should be with approximately 8,000 people watching
    Now I have added "the" then the capitals are justified, as I read JOBTILE. Added approximately Mujinga (talk) 12:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Phoolan Devi faced the 48 criminal charges — We have been already told this
    yes and i want to emphasise that the charges made in absentia were then held, happy to try to make that clearer if needed Mujinga (talk) 12:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Kanpur district court — Should be 'Kanpur District Court'
    done Mujinga (talk) 20:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article Assassination of Phoolan Devi should be a redirect to the assassination section of this article
    done Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At 13:30" — 13:30 where? Specify IST
    ok Mujinga (talk) 12:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ashok Roy made the 1984 film Phoolan Devi — Our article says 1985. Of-course that has nothing to do with this FAC, but can you just recheck the year.
    aha I was a bit mystified here but the wikiarticle is the about the 1985 hindi film, not the 1984 bengali one. same director and Rita Bhaduri starred as Phoolan Devi in both!? so I've moved the link Mujinga (talk) 20:44, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic work! I can only imagine how hard it must have been to research and write such a complex subject. I sort of agree with @Dwaipayan, and have tried to be a bit nit-picky, so apologies for that. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments! Will respond later today or tomorrow Mujinga (talk) 15:48, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the comment about it being a complex subject, it is really is. The nitpicks have been really handy, sadly I've run out of time today but hope to finish off tomorrow. Mujinga (talk) 21:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again Kavyansh.Singh, I've replied on everything now, see what you think Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try revisiting this within a day or two. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 21:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Second read
  • another wife who enjoyed mistreating her. — Not a major issue, but if we could rephrase it as "another wife who often mistreated Phoolan Devi.", I think it would be a bit more encyclopedic.
  • Indian feminist groups were recording many — "Indian feminist groups recorded many". Sounds better?
  • Do the sources discuss Phoolan Devi what we claim her to be in the infobox: a "Human rights activist"?

Looking much better! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:18, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Grnrchst

[edit]

Hope it's ok if I leave some comments on this. This article looks fantastic and I know you've put a lot of work into it, so I'm more than happy to give it a look over. --Grnrchst (talk) 13:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • "She became a heroine to the lower castes for being a Robin Hood figure who punished her rapists and evaded capture by the authorities." Sentence structure here is a bit odd on first glance. Consider a slight rewrite?
    Damn I made an answer here but wikipedia went down earlier and it must've got lost. I see what you mean and suggested "When she punished her rapists and evaded capture by the authorities, she became a heroine to the lower castes who saw her as a Robin Hood figure" Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She was assassinated outside her house by Sher Singh Rana" What motivated the assassin?
    I'd rather not get into it in the lead I think because it takes the focus away from her Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which told her life story in a way she did not approve of." Might be worth saying why she didn't approve of it? Even a little detail would go a long way in clarifying what she didn't like about it.
    This sentence has been scrutinised a lot over the FAC, I'm not sure what to add, but feel free to put in a detail Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Early life
  • "Given names vary between texts" Worth clarifying that this is about the village, as I was confused by the term "given name" which I usually see applied to people. Maybe move the explanatory footnote inline with the village name itself?
    good point, hopefully resolved by removing "given" Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Hindu caste system in India" Hrm, this is potentially problematic. The Indian caste system isn't limited to Hindu faiths, nor are all Hindus believers in it, and there are different understandings of what it is. I would recommend either dropping "Hindu" as an adjective or linking instead to the Hindu varna system, if it's necessary to be specific.
  • "Indian society is divided into four castes or social classes." Again, this is describing the varna system. "Indian society" implies something much broader.
    same as above Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the uncle"; "the family". The use of "the" here is a bit odd. Why not use "her"?
    I don't know any more I just want this FAC to be over hahaha, I'm sure you can relate :) "the uncle and his son" reads better to me than "her uncle and his son" but I wouldn't be at all fussed if you wanted to change it. Mujinga (talk) 17:58, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Devi's full name is used a lot in this section, is there a reason for this?
    this is another thing that has been discussed at some length and whilst it does read awkwardly, the consensus seems to be to use "Phoolan Devi" at every mention rather than using a contracted version Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Puttilal had taken another wife who enjoyed mistreating her" His new wife enjoyed mistreating Devi?
    yes Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the parental home" Again, shouldn't this be "her parental home"?
    again I prefer the but please change it if you want to Mujinga (talk) 17:58, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "recording many instances of women being attacked and murdered by men" Do we have more specific figures than "many"? Gender violence is a big issue, so I think showing the magnitude may help.
    Sen doesn't give figures, only a few horrendous examples Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The director of the Women's Feature Service commented" Might be worth a wee clarification that this was specifically in relation to Devi's case.
    Sure! Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bandit Queen
  • In the explanatory footnote, you should probably use semi-colons instead of commas to separate different author's depictions
    Sure, done. I get the impression Dwaipayan isn't keen on semi-colons but I think they work here Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Vikram Mallah and Phoolan Devi fell in love." Think this could be moved earlier in the paragraph, so just after it mentions Vikram killing Gujjar, as it would contextualise their relationship better than having it after details of the gang's exploits.
    Hmmm. I agree the setnence is a bit jerky, but it was a bit of a saga apparently, Vikram Mallah at first was attracted to her and she wasn't interested, then feelings blossomed over time, not sure how much of that needs to be in the article. Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    rejigged, see what you think! Mujinga (talk) 12:28, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They found and punished Puttilal" Punished how?
    Sen quotes Phoolan Devi saying: "All through this I was beating him black and blue, using the butt of my rifle, my hands, my feet. “We tied up Puttilal and his wife Vidya and we left the village with them. I wanted to kill them in the vicinity of the Sikandra police station and leave a note that this would be the fate of any man who married two wives. “When we were barely a mile from the police station, I changed my mind and decided not to kill them but to let them live to tell the tale. This time I beat them both, so much so that Puttilal lost two of his teeth and I broke his arms and legs, before leaving them there, tied together, with a letter to the daroga [police inspector], claiming responsibility for the act."
    In putting that down I realised perhaps you are asking punished in what sense, so could add "violently"? Mujinga (talk) 16:18, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    On second thouhgts I made it: "They located Puttilal and punished him violently" Mujinga (talk) 16:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That works! --Grnrchst (talk) 19:55, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she was celebrated by most of the Indian mainstream media" How are we defining "most"?
  • Spotcheck: Only The Guardian describes her as "India's answer to Robin Hood". Neither BBC News nor Signs describe her as such. Only BBC News mentions the Indian media, which it says "glorified [her]" and "wrote tirelessly of her exploits". This sentence should probably be rewritten, as it seems like their might be some synthesis of sources here.
    yeah I think you're right about it needing tweaking and actually last time I read this through, "most of the Indian mainstream media" did seem a strange turn of phrase. BBC does say "one of India's most famous outlaws" though. signs p125 introduces her as "Phoolan Devi, a legendary lower-caste woman dacoit in India who was known for raiding villages with her gang and redistributing wealth from upper-class, upper-caste landlords to poor landless villagers" which I would take as summarisable by "a Robin Hood figure" but now I'm wondering if that's a helpful comparison. in any case removed "by most of the Indian mainstream media"
    added Seal as another explicit Robin Hood reference Mujinga (talk) 12:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She was seen as an incarnation of the Hindu goddess Durga" By who?
  • Spotcheck: Journal of Religion and Violence seems to say she was seen this way by "the down-trodden" (dalits?), and that she saw herself this way. BBC News source verifies the thing about the doll.
    yes the "down-trodden" indeed so after a bit of rejigging i hope it's clear it's the Other Backward Classes mentioned in the previous sentence Mujinga (talk) 16:24, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aye that reads much better now :D --Grnrchst (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Think the first couple sentences of the second paragraph could be condensed a bit, so as not to take focus away from Devi.
    It's difficult because the information here then explains why the Behmai massacre occurred and why it had such massive repercussions, so I can't see what to chop out Mujinga (talk) 17:58, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Behmai massacre
Surrender
Political career
  • "Hindu caste system" As per above, should clarify that this is the varna system and probably delink caste system in India.
    same answer as above I'm afraid - I'm happy to discuss but loathe to change what seems to be generally agreed to be ok Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • How was she able to regain her seat? (More info about the elections would be good, if there's sourcing for it)
    It's a good question, I'm not really finding anything here, I'm afraid Mujinga (talk) 12:29, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she later renounced Buddhism" Any reason given for why?
    no, like many things in this article the more you look the less you find haha Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bandit Queen film
  • If Devi disputed the accuracy of the film, does she also think similarly of Mala Sen's biography? Or was it that loosely adapted?
    this is another tricky one .. Phoolan Devi was interviewed by Sen and was broadly ok with the resulting book, then it was adapted and although Sen got the credit it was actually her exhusband Farrukh Dhondy who adapted it and "jazzed it up", then the director Shekhar Kapur imposed his narrative on it. so the film isn't a reflection of the book whch is quite nuanced Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might be worth adding some information about the release and reception of Mala Sen's biography. This section could then be expanded into "Media depictions" or something?
    hmm yes this is an interesting one, I'll do a source sweep Mujinga (talk) 17:58, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    still busy with this Mujinga (talk) 11:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    it does seem strange to me but can't find very much on this. a lot of people refer to it but don't really say much about it. i could only find one review. maybe the book became more famous after the film. Mujinga (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Assassination
  • Is it common to contract "rupees" to "Rs"? I've not seen this before.
    thanks for noticing that, it's a hangover from removing the templates - rupee talks of "Indian rupees (₹) and Pakistani rupees (Rs. )" Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy
  • "Devi is an example of a Third World postcolonial subject who is aware of the racist and patronising Orientalist attitudes that First World analysts have of her" Could you explain further? What attitudes specifically?
    First time round I said "Media theorist Sandra Ponzanesi sees Devi's life as an exemplary case of a postcolonial subject attempting to preserve their agency in the face of an Orientalist gaze" and was asked to make it clearer. I'm mot getting much from the article reading it again but I think generally the point is that Phoolan Devi is avoiding being pigeonholed as the vulnerable poor lower caste person with no agency and also being the lower class hero with no imperfections. Mujinga (talk) 11:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Ashok Roy made the 1984 film [...]" As these films were made and released during her life, it may be worth moving up into the proposed "Media depictions" section.
    I'm fine with you making changes, I think I'm getting article fatigue at this point so I don't have the headspace for structural changes. Mujinga (talk) 11:16, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suspect the paragraph about the court case will be updated as it progresses.
    pretty much everyone is now dead or close to death, so I'm not sure if it will ever get to the judgement stage, what a farce. Mujinga (talk) 17:58, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Also in 2021, tributes were paid to Phoolan Devi" Did anything prompt this series of tributes?
    they're marking twenty years since her assassination, which is in the text but probably a bit buried if you didn't clock it Mujinga (talk) 13:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    made that clearer Mujinga (talk) 16:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, this is a wonderfully-written article that has taught me a lot about this very interesting person. My comments are mostly minor, but there's a few cases I think where the article is potentially falling short of a quick-support. Ping me when you've responded to these and I'll be happy to take another look. Excellent work, as always! --Grnrchst (talk) 13:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look! I'll hope to reply soon Mujinga (talk) 10:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still busy with replies, could I ask you to give an opinion on Kavyansh.Singh's second round query on tense as well? Thanks! Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Grnrchst Thanks a lot for the queries, it prodded me to search for info in new ways, although I haven't dredged up a huge amount more. I've answered on everything, we might need to discuss still on some points. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 12:31, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Phoolan_Devi/archive1&oldid=1185782134"