Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/August 15, 2022

Dated blurb

Gog the Mild gettin' more nervous. The FAR is now finally close to closing (it was not when nominated TFA), but no one has shown an interest in updating the blurb. The last sentence is not in the article. Might you be the best one to update the blurb, based on the current lead (which I believe is finished)? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:06, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SG I have some stuff to finish in the morning, but I'm happy to update the blurb in light of my understanding. I'm sorry I had not paid attention to this earlier. Will do it in the early afternoon. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:33, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Grand! The problem is that other mainpage editors will start combing through it soon. See the instructions I posted at Talk:Darjeeling. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PS, letting Dying know you plan to work on it before they get here ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:53, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SG I've read it quite a few times. Gog's blurb is pretty smart. I was thinking maybe the lack of jobs might be mentioned, but on second thoughts, it's not a good idea. Deforestation is mentioned. So good to go for me. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:10, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Except that you might need to work deforestation into the lead at the article SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:13, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Well in that case Gog can take it out. I think they are more experienced in writing these blurbs. Or, if you'd like SG you could have a go at it. Probably not worth tinkering with the lead now, at least not for me. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. This was not my talk page. Not sure why I thought it was. Please Gog go ahead and update it in light of your best understanding of the lead. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:13, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

F&f, this is the blurb; did you mean to say that it's OK? I think it is. Gog has already worked on it. I was saying that you might need to update the lead of the article so that the blurb reflects that lead-- that is, add deforestation to the lead at the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:19, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you decide not to work deforestation in to the article lead, that is OK, too ... it is well covered in the article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:20, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SG, Gog, and Dwaipayan. Yesterday was a busy day and I was distracted. This morning I read the blurb again and noticed some implications that shouldn't be there. All have resulted from my original misreading or miscommunication. So, I'll make some changes now, before its too late. I've pinging Dwaipayan, as he knows the town first hand. Gog who is a masterful writer can then fix any prose issues I might have introduced. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:18, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm done. Small changes. Please tell me what is wrong or undue. If the deforestation affecting the town's water supply is not in the lead, I'll add it. It is plenty sourced. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On my character counter, it is 963 Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:55, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, Gog, the sentence, "The Darjeeling Himalayan Railway, ascending 7,000 feet ..." is masterful. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good (now I can stop fretting, and move on to working on Joan of Arc :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworked it into the lead, reworked the last two paras as a matter of fact. (I will add the business about the easygoing culture which is now in the lead, but which is sourced, into the culture section after dinner.) Gog can read the lead again and decide if they want to alter anything in the blurb. The blurb is OK by me regardless. Thanks for posting SG and clarifying. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:34, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This version looks superb.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:35, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the ping, SandyGeorgia. i have copyedited the blurb to make changes that i believe are uncontroversial, but do not mind if anyone wishes to revert some or all of my changes. i have a few points i hope to raise later, but i believe they are all minor. dying (talk) 23:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good to me Dying; I was wondering about those country links, but knew you could be counted on! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:47, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Dying Apologies for my mean edit summary. My fingers sometime run way ahead of my brain. :( What I meant to say was the "Indian town" is more commonly used when we need to dab a situation. E.g. "Last night snow blanketed the Eastern Himalayas. The Indian town of Darjeeling received 10 inches; the Bhutanese capital of Thimpu received 22 inches, and the Nepalese city of Pokahara 13 inches." But out of the blue, without context or previous mention, it sounds a little too informal, and could be seen to be pejorative by some. Dwaipayan would have a better idea. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
no worries, Fowler&fowler, i appreciate the explanation. i had only used the phrase "Indian town" because that was the wording used previously, and i had not realized that there were any issues with it. (i had interpreted your edit summary to mean that you had reworded it to link to the india article without the need for a pipe.)
in any case, i finally got around to compiling the list of minor points i mentioned before. (apologies for the delay.)

[01]  ▶  i found the use of "ascending" unusual, since "ascending" deals with motion, while the verb "is" deals with existence. i probably would have changed this to "which ascends" had i not noticed that you had stated that the wording is masterful, so i could be alone in finding this wording unusual.

[02]  ▶  i think the use of "today" in "the majority of Darjeeling's residents today" violates mos:current, but i was not sure if removing it would break the flow of that sentence.

[03]  ▶  the article body does not appear to mention that darjeeling had been "founded as a summer retreat". although it later became one, lloyd and grant appear to have simply considered the location ideal for a sanatorium. summer does not appear to be mentioned until much later.

[04]  ▶  the vertical distance the railway ascends does not seem to be mentioned in the article. it does state that ghoom railway station is at 2,300 m, though i think what is more relevant is the altitude difference between the station at ghoom (at 2,258 m according to its article) and the station at new jalpaiguri junction (at 114 m according to its article).

[05]  ▶  i could not find a source stating that the town's population growth led to unregulated construction being common. i can believe it, but the only mention of unregulated construction i remember seeing in the article body is "the unplanned upper-level construction" that could collapse during an earthquake.

[06]  ▶  from the article body, i did not get the sense that deforestation had damaged the springs; i had thought the main issue was that the water distribution system was not being properly maintained.

i thought i might also mention a few minor issues with the article itself, since i assume they would be easy for you to address, though i am not sure myself how to properly address them.

[07]  ▶  regarding the description of the investments totalling "more than five million pound sterling", is "pound sterling" considered a proper plural form?

[08]  ▶  i admittedly know little about how ultraviolet radiation is measured and am unfamiliar with the "microwave watt", but "4500 microwave watts per square cm per day" sounds terrible. should this have been "4500 microwatts per square cm per day"?

[09]  ▶  similarly, i think the statement that darjeeling tea "constitutes about 0.005%" of the tea produced in india seems incorrect. should this have stated "0.5%" (or "0.005")? if not, then i think at least one of the kilogram values mentioned is incorrect.

[10]  ▶  the percentages provided in the description of the education background of those living in slums does not add up to 100% (as 13% + 45% + 13% + 10% = 81%). does this mean that 19% have not completed primary school?

[11]  ▶  the placement of footnote [o] confuses me, as the footnote discusses the number of tea estates and their yields, but the sentence it follows describes the appearance of orthodox tea.

anyway, as i mentioned before, these are all minor points, so please don't worry about them if you don't have the time to address them, as i think the blurb is currently good for the main page. hope this helps! dying (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll reply to the more general points in a couple of hours. Your points are good. Numbers alone don't make for a popular tourist experience. The fault was mine Gog was only trying to work with what I gave them. But what you think about this? I think it avoids all the issues you mention:

Darjeeling is a town in India's Eastern Himalayas, not far from Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and China. In the mid-19th century, when much of India was under East India Company rule, Darjeeling became a summer retreat. On the slopes below, tea plantations were laid out where Darjeeling tea is grown. Thousands of labourers from the surrounding kingdoms built the town and worked in the tea plantations. Their descendants make up most of the town's residents and give it a cosmopolitan ethnic mix. The Darjeeling Himalayan Railway, which climbs 2,100 metres (7,000 ft) up a landscape in which stands of teak give way to Himalayan pine, is a World Heritage Site and a popular tourist experience. The local economy is largely dependent on tourism and tea growing. Unregulated construction, traffic congestion and water shortages are common. Deforestation, both before India's independence and after, has damaged Darjeeling's environment.

The current one is:

Darjeeling is a town in India's Eastern Himalayas, situated close to the borders with Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan and China. In the mid-19th century, when much of India was under East India Company rule, Darjeeling was founded as a summer retreat. On the slopes below, tea plantations were laid out where Darjeeling tea is grown. Thousands of labourers from the surrounding regions built the town and worked in the tea plantations. Their descendants constitute the majority of Darjeeling's residents today and give the town a cosmopolitan ethnic mix. The Darjeeling Himalayan Railway, ascending 2,100 metres (7,000 ft), is a World Heritage Site and a popular tourist experience. The local economy is largely dependent on tourism and tea growing. Population growth has made unregulated construction, traffic congestion and water shortages common. Deforestation has damaged the environment, including the springs that supply the town's water.

I'd be leery about changing much more than this so close to TFA. I'm not even sure about this. SandyG and Dwaipayan who are wiser and more experienced will have a better idea. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 16:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is India's 75 independence day tomorrow. A mention in the last sentence would be appropriate. All sentences are sourced and in the article; they may not be in precisely this form in the lead, but they are there in the article. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 17:07, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to ping Dying Fowler&fowler «Talk» 17:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, as I'm reading my second version, I don't like it so much. I think Gog's current one is better. Perhaps other will recommend changes. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 17:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not going to enter a discussion of changing the blurb this close to the deadline, but I have long been concerned whether everything in the blurb or in the lead is in the article, so suggest paying very close attentoin to that very quickly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:41, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
oh, Fowler&fowler, i do appreciate the time taken to rewrite the blurb, but hesitate to have it change so radically unless something is actually factually incorrect in it. it is my fault for not having been more clear before, but points 01 and 02 were the only points that i thought might warrant a minor change in the blurb. points 03 through 06 i had assumed were issues that could be addressed by simply adding that information to the article if it was not there already.
for example, i was able to independently verify the information in point 04, but was surprised that i could not find it in the article, so i thought i should point this out. in addition, i am admittedly slightly skeptical about the information in point 03, but i believe the blurb is technically correct as it stands, as the town was founded as a retreat that was presumably also open during the summer. in any case, simply dropping "summer" can also resolve this point if there is no evidence that it was founded specifically as a summer retreat.
also, i think it would be nice to mention india's independence, but feel that the proposed last sentence is rather awkward. (i had tried to figure out how to include it in the blurb myself, but had found no natural solution.) many blurbs end up never mentioning the events they are commemorating, so it would not be unusual for this one to omit it as well.
from your rewrite, i gather that you agree with points 01 and 02. am i correct? i do not mind if you actually disagree but had simply meant to address my points. i also think replacing "ascending" with "which climbs up", based on your rewrite, is a suitable alternative. dying (talk) 20:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I hadn't seen this when I replied below. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:17, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

F&f's point by point replies

01. Very true. The participial clause is misapplied. But it (Gog's) is still a more forceful construction than the relative clause ("which ascends ...") It can be changed to "The Darjeeling Himalayan Railway, its journey ascending 2,100 metres (7,000 ft), is a World Heritage Site and a popular tourist experience." If you agree, we'll have to ask an admin to do this.
02. Not sure MOS:CURRENT applies. It is a blurb for a certain date, not for a timeless encyclopedia article. Today has the meaning of "these days" or "in the present time," partly emphatic and partly a rhetorical device. You are right without it it will lose its flow. That is my sense of it.
03. Technically true, but I wouldn't worry too much about that. It was imagined by Campbell and Grant as a sanatorium, a place for R&R, etc, it was leased in order to become that. We say the municipality was founded in 1850. I think most people understand that it takes time for a town to become established. The tea was gravy.
04. Again technically true. But a reader of the history section gets plenty of notion that the course (of a horse carriage or train) rises more than 6500 meters to D. and 7000 to Ghoom. In a blurb if we quantify this too much or if in the article we simplify it too much, it becomes repetitive, in my humble view.
05 Very good catch and a big thank you. I will fix this. What is worse is that it seems to put the blame on the population than on poor urban planning.
Done. Now a full quote (rather than paraphrase) in Environment.
06 Again. Very good catch and a big thank you. It had been there in Environment. Got taken out. But too much was taken out. Reinstated with the sentence rephrased.
07 is fine. (e.g. Pfizer vows to fight Lipitor copies in Canada | Fierce Pharma |This comes just nine months after Oxford announced a 50 million pound sterling ($68 million) investment)
08 Thank you. Couldn't decide whether that was me or the auto corrector. But a big booboo. Corrected.
09 I looked into this. It was added by Dwaipayan. I am unable to figure out this source. I generally don't cite to primary sources for this reason. Could either of you Dying or Dwaipayan, please correct this?
Done as far as my responsibility goes.
10 Yes I had noticed that too. The author doesn't say. But what you suggest is implied. I felt it would not something we could say in WP's voice though. I've tweaked it a little but not sure it has helped. I think a reader who is paying that kind of attention will figure it out.
11 Later

Note: Thank you Dying. But please have them correct 01, either in the manner I suggested or yours. Your best judgment. It needs an admin. Perhaps you are, or perhaps Sandy Georgia or Dwaipayan are. Thanks a million. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:49, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I meant 6500 ft Fowler&fowler «Talk» 21:55, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, you will need to ask Gog the Mild or someone else ... I am not an admin, and these issues should have been wrapped up months ago ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler&fowler:

regarding point 01, i was unsure if the effect of the "more forceful construction" was deliberate, but had only wished to point it out in case it wasn't. i think the "its journey ascending" rewrite is interesting but a bit more clumsy than what is already there, so i'd leave it as is.
regarding point 02, i admittedly do not know if it is just me, but i have found the tfa archives to be a good resource of short blurbs for well-written articles, so have regularly perused them even before i started regularly copyediting blurbs. as a result, i try to conform to mos:current if i can, even though i am not sure if doing so is standard for tfa blurbs (though i think it might be). that being said, this feels like an instance where it can probably be ignored if conforming to it would break the flow.
regarding point 04, i think the wording in the blurb is fine, but there does not appear to be enough information in the article to support the fact that the railway ascends 2,100 metres. one possible way to address this is to state the altitude of siliguri somewhere in the article. to avoid repetition, it doesn't have to be stated near the mentions of the other altitudes.
regarding point 07, the example you mention is one in which "pound sterling" is used as part of a modifier, so it presumably does not need to be in plural form there. in any case, if you think "pound sterling" is a proper plural form, i'll trust you.

everything else looks good so far, so i do not think it is necessary to get an administrator's attention. thanks for addressing these issues so quickly! dying (talk) 22:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've taken care of your major points. Please correct the 0.005%; as I say above I was not able to parse it. As for the last bit about footnotes, if you don't mind I'll look at it tomorrow. Again, thanks very much for you help. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:07, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the percentage to 0.5%. --Dwaipayan (talk) 12:40, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Dwaipayan. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 13:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

no worries about the minor issues regarding the article itself; i think the far process already did a good job bringing this article back up to fa quality. i generally only mention issues that only pertain to an article if i had enjoyed reading the article, i had found issues that i think may be easily overlooked or may be substantial in some way, and i think that the editors working on it may appreciate knowing them. thanks for improving the article! dying (talk) 23:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually amazed that you could read so carefully at both a high-level (lo-res) and low-level (hi-res). My thanks and admiration, Dying! Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

many thanks for those kind words, Fowler&fowler. your quick, detailed, and considered response to my suggestions is also similarly appreciated. dying (talk) 03:55, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]