Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Phoolan Devi/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kavyansh.Singh (talk | contribs) at 21:41, 12 November 2023 (→‎Comments from Kavyansh: +). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Phoolan Devi

Phoolan Devi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox
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

Collapsed comments
  • "She won with a majority of 37,000" I think you mean "margin of 37,000 votes" here. AryKun (talk) 13:27, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    source uses "majority" - I'd welcome another opinion here since "majority" reads ok to me Mujinga (talk) 08:39, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Majority" is clearly incorrect; it's usually used to signify the percentage or number of total votes (eg "a majority of 52% of the votes" or "a majority of 300,000 votes"). 37,000 votes are evidently not a majority, they're the margin she won by. AryKun (talk) 09:47, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is templated as being written in Indian English, so if you can say "margin" would be more common in Indian English that would be a decent rationale, it's my opinion that at least in British English "majority" is ok Mujinga (talk) 13:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Checking the dictionary, the use of "majority" in that way seems to be exclusive to British English; I've never heard anyone use the word that way in Indian English. AryKun (talk) 13:28, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Great that's an easy fix then, changed to "margin" Mujinga (talk) 10:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • Needs a comma after the name since you have "popularly known as" afterwards.
    added Mujinga (talk) 16:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "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]
  • "in absentia" should be in italics.
    done Mujinga (talk) 16:11, 27 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]
  • "collecting dung cakes" You collect dung, not dung cakes. Also, dung as a source of fuel is common in Indian villages even today; if this is going to be mentioned, I'd like to see a quote from the source explicitly mentioning this as helping them "survive".
    I'll have to check the sources so this one is left open for now Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    changed to "Phoolan Devi's family made dung cakes to burn as fuel and grew chickpeas, sunflowers and pearl millet." does that work? Mujinga (talk) 08:27, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, sure. AryKun (talk) 09:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    great! Mujinga (talk) 07:56, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No name for the uncle?
    I'll have to check the sources so this one is left open for now Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sen says Biharilal Mujinga (talk) 08:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "his son (her cousin)" Just say Maiyadin.
    yes it coudl be phrased better, I went for "her cousin Maiyadin " Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    changed again Mujinga (talk) 08:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who offered" Sounds like Puttilal gave them the dowry; should be the other way round.
    no it was Puttilal so you read it right Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Then that wasn't a dowry; a dowry is given by the bride to the groom. AryKun (talk) 09:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    took out the word Mujinga (talk) 08:12, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "₹ 100" No space after the sign.
    done! Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "months later Puttilal" → "months later, Puttilal"
    done! Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "later became sick" Fell sick is more appropriate.
    sure I'll take "fell" and i cut out later since there's a previous one Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who gave a diagnosis of" → "diagnosed her with"
    went for "diagnosed" Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Puttilal took her back" → "Puttilal would take her back"
    I don't think "would" is needed here Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the station" Specify police station, somewhat unclear at first read.
    done Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "attempted to seize" → "kidnapped"
    sure! Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Shri Ram Singh" Is Shri actually his name or just an honorific?
    I'm following the sources Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, what do the sources say? This is a question, not an abstract pontification. AryKun (talk) 16:47, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've checked three and they all say "Sri Ram Singh", so changed to that Mujinga (talk) 08:11, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, Sri is a common honorific in India, but is also sometimes a given name; I'm asking whether the use in this case is as an honorific or as his actual name. If it's an honorific, we shouldn't be using it. AryKun (talk) 09:18, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That goes beyond the sources, but it seems to be used as part of the name, just as the brother is Lalla Ram Singh Mujinga (talk) 07:51, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    eg p135 Sen: "He had always suspected that Sri Ram, in particular, was in the pay of UP police as an informer." Mujinga (talk) 08:30, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "confirmed by the evidence" Corroborated, not confirmed.
    I don't think much is wrong about confirmed, but "corroborated" also works so changed Mujinga (talk) 16:45, 27 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]
  • Needs a Hindi transliteration of her name.
    that's beyond my capabilities, at this stage probably it's worth making a list to ask for help at WP:INDIA in case there's anything else too Mujinga (talk) 16:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    फूलन देवी. Copy paste that AryKun (talk) 16:52, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    would you mind doing it? i don't speak hindi so if there's any questions on it, prob better for them to come to you. thanks! Mujinga (talk) 08:24, 1 October 2023 (UTC
    Would like to push back on this. Per the MOS (see WP:INDICSCRIPT) Indian subjects do not have their names rendered in native scripts due to previous debates over what writing systems to include. MSG17 (talk) 01:51, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the comment MSG17! Mujinga (talk) 12:12, 2 October 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]
  • "were amplified" → "intensified" or similar, "were amplified" implies someone was amplifying them
    i think calls can be amplified, happy to take another opinion on that Mujinga (talk) 16:14, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "told her life story in a way she herself did not approve of" Again, how does this matter?
    i am summarising the article Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "protest against the injustice" Injustice is editorializing.
    what word would you suggest? Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "into unconsciousness" I don't think "into consciousness" is a phrase.
    works for me, I'm Br-Eng though Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "preying on" Again, editorializing.
    what word would you suggest? Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "enjoyed mistreating her" Ambiguous, say Devi.
    Sentence reads "Again, Phoolan Devi needed to leave the village and Maiyadin pressured the family to ask Puttilal to take her back, which he did; in the meantime, he had taken another wife who enjoyed mistreating her" so to me it's clear who "her" refers to, happy to take other opinions Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Her" could be confused for the second wife. AryKun (talk) 09:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think so Mujinga (talk) 07:49, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to the parental" → "to her parental"
    "she again returned to the parental home" reads fine to me? Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Chheda Singh" Who is this guy? Why does he matter?
    This came up at PR, happy to remove if other people agree Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just remove it if he isn't mentioned anywhere else in the article. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed per consensus Mujinga (talk) 08:03, 30 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]
  • "Phoolan Devi spent over ten years on remand" Why?
    I really wish I had a reliable source to answer that question, this was also discussed at PR Mujinga (talk) 17:01, 27 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]
  • What argument does Roy make in her article, since you mention it?
    see above Mujinga (talk) 08:44, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Above comment doesn't address Roy's article. What exactly did Roy say to support Devi's oppose to the film?
    Ah sorry, Moxham's first name is Roy so I thought you meant him. Added the argument. Mujinga (talk) 08:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please stop quoting the article as a reply to a comment; I read the article, each comment is pointing out an issue that I feel exists with the current form of the article, and quoting the thing I have an issue with is not a response to the issue pointed out. AryKun (talk) 16:54, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @AryKun we are in an edit conflcit, would you mind letting me finish off the replies? thanks! Mujinga (talk) 16:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @AryKun thanks for the comments, I'm done with the first round of replies and will dip into the sources for some other answers a bit later on Mujinga (talk) 17:05, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @AryKun I replied on your replies and am interested to hear your thoughts Mujinga (talk) 08:45, 28 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
  • "family and to steal" Drop the "to"
    the subject here is "the uncle and son continued" so "to steal" works for me Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, but you already have a "to" from the last verb, so there isn't a need for another "to" after the "and".
    I still prefer it the way it is, having read it out loud both ways. Perhaps someone else has an opinion Mujinga (talk) 08:45, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "that it contained" It is ambiguous, just say document.
    sorry i'm not seeing the ambiguity? Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think maybe the "it" could be replaced by "the document". AryKun (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I find using document twice a bit clumsy Mujinga (talk) 08:45, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • "After several years, Puttilal abandoned Phoolan Devi beside the river" reads fine to me?
    The definite article is grammatically incorrect, say "a river" or name the exact river. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "beside a river" would suggest a random river to me, could say "beside the local river" if that works for you? Mujinga (talk) 07:50, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, although it would be better if you could name the exact river (if the sources mention it). AryKun (talk) 12:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    checked source, added Yamuna Mujinga (talk) 08:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he killed Gujjar" When, how, why?
    is any of that really necessary? I'd have to check the sources but I don't remember a huge amount of detail here and the when is quite confused Mujinga (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    According to the movie about her, Vikram killed Gujjar because he caught the latter raping Devi; seems worth mentioning if true. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If you mean Bandit Queen, its version of her story is not to be trusted generally. On this particular point, yes Vikram became fond of her and therefore killed Gujjar because he was mistreating her, is that not clear in the text? Mujinga (talk) 08:15, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Wouldn't hurt to make it explicit. AryKun (talk) 13:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    added "and objected to her mistreatment" Mujinga (talk) 08:48, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "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]
  • "her father Devidin" Why don't you mention him alongside her mother?
    current version is "Phoolan Devi's mother was called Moola. Devi had four sisters and one brother; her father Devidin had one brother, who had a son called Maiyadin. Phoolan Devi's uncle and his son (her cousin) stole land from her father by bribing the village leader to change the land records" Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, so why isn't her father mentioned alongside her mother in the sentence "Phoolan Devi's mother was called Moola"? AryKun (talk) 09:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you suggest how you'd like to see that sentence please? Mujinga (talk) 08:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Phoolan Devi's father was called Devidin and her mother was called Moola" for consistency?
    thanks, rephrased Mujinga (talk) 08:45, 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.
  • I prefer to keep it since I want the body of the article to be correct, happy to hear other opinions Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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]
  • "also known locally as bahghis" You never use this name again, so just cut it.
    For me, including the local name is useful just so people don't wonder if there's a difference between dacoits and bahghis if they read into the soucres Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If a reader is dedicated enough to read the sources, they can probably figure this out by themselves. AryKun (talk) 13:16, 2 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]
  • "become a legendary figure" Sounds peacock-y.
    i'm following the sources I would say but happy to consider alternatives Mujinga (talk) 17:04, 27 September 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]
  • "to the outrage of the widows of Behmai" Non-encyclopedic tone.
    what would you suggest here? it is a rather highstakes situation Mujinga (talk) 17:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's an excessively sensational phrase that would be used by a newspaper, not an encyclopedia; just cut it. AryKun (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    it seems worth noting that when Phoolan didn't attend the trial, the widows of the murdered men were outraged, but happy to change the wording if it seems sensational, what would you suggest? Mujinga (talk) 07:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean, the widows would obviously be outraged; their husbands were murdered, so it isn't surprising or anything. Mentioning it like doesn't seem encyclopedic in tone to me. AryKun (talk) 13:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    i chopped out the phrase Mujinga (talk) 20:40, 18 October 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]
  • Why is In culture before Assassination?
    What would you suggest here? Mujinga (talk) 17:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Put Assassination before In culture to maintain the chronology of her life.
    that would be wrong though, she was still alive for "in culture" - perhaps we should change the name to something else, nothing springs to mind Mujinga (talk) 08:26, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Probably best to change the name if you can think of an alternative, since In culture sections are usually at the end of articles. AryKun (talk) 13:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think DaxServer set up this section with "Popular culture", I changed it to "In culture" to avoid it looking like "In popular culture" but now we've hit the same problem. Mujinga (talk) 08:39, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • Mujinga, I've struck my oppose now since I don't think the few issues left warrant an oppose; once the remaining comments are dealt with, I think we'll be good to go here. AryKun (talk) 08:14, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Great! My internet access is going to be sporadic the next few days and looking at the discussions above I'm thinking for most of them I'd welcome another opinion, so hopefully one comes in that time. I'll make a few quick replies now Mujinga (talk) 13:07, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    made some more replies Mujinga (talk) 20:44, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    added a few more Mujinga (talk) 11:45, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Placeholder; at first glance, it looks pretty comprehensive, but there are a rather lot of prose issues that I can see. AryKun (talk) 13:53, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are varying accounts of her life because she told her story in different ways." There got to be a better way to phrase this. "She told her story in different ways" just sounds like something a fan group would say about someone caught lying.
    happy to hear other opinions on this Mujinga (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "she told her story in different ways" is definitely an overly nice way of saying she sometimes lied. AryKun (talk) 13:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure if we can say she lied - people deal with traumatic events in different ways and in the text we say "Sen notes that it is common for victims of sexual assault to avoid or repress talking about what happened to them." Mujinga (talk) 08:28, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    any further action required? Mujinga (talk) 20:40, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd still like this to be rephrased. AryKun (talk) 07:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Any suggestions? I'm not tied to the phrasing I just want to communicate in the lead that there are different versions of her life story and that includes the versions she herself told. Mujinga (talk) 11:45, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't think of any suggestions for the last comment, so fine with supporting now. AryKun (talk) 15:22, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @AryKun thanks both for supporting and for the edits you've been making. Mujinga (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:Phoolan_Devi-Bandit_Queen.jpg needs a more expansive FUR
  • File:Phoolan_Devi.jpg: on what was this image based? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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]
  • To clarify, my question isn't licensing, but accuracy - see this discussion. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:03, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh ok! Thanks will look into it Mujinga (talk) 08:01, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure what to make of this, in that I'm just not sure whether it's good to include a drawing or not. Maybe best is to remove it then? Mujinga (talk) 12:42, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    removed per further discussion with GRuban Mujinga (talk) 17:00, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Choliamb

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

  • 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
  • Should use |orig-year= for 1991 and date 1995. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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]
  • FN8 is Moxham, an ebook, so I've now linked the relevant chapter in each case. Nikkimaria I think that means I've answered everything, thanks for the source review Mujinga (talk) 14:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • What about Times of India? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just checking you saw my answer above about ToI. Mujinga (talk) 18:50, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've removed Pugazhendhi Mujinga (talk) 16:07, 27 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]

Coordinator note

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

Recusing to review.

  • Moxham: could we have the page ranges for the chapters cited please. And can the cite be narrowed down to less that the whole of both chapters?
    I only have access to Moxham as an ebook with no page numbers, that's why I added chapters. I seem to vaguely remember something about using keywords to cite ebooks, if you know how it works I'd be happy to do that. Mujinga (talk) 14:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pugazhendhi: does this work have a publisher, a location and/or an identifier (eg an ISBN or OCLC)?
    Nikkimaria flagged this above in the source review and I think removal is probably the best option. Removed.Mujinga (talk) 14:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who became a Member of Parliament". Why the upper-case initial letters?
    changed to lower case in the instances wwhere her constituency isn't mentioned Mujinga (talk) 17:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who was eventually convicted for the murder in 2014." As you have both boundary dates there is no need for the PoV "eventually".
    that's there because he was convicted after a long saga, but take your point and removed Mujinga (talk) 14:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she herself". Delete "herself", who else would she be?
    fair point, removed Mujinga (talk) 14:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She had four sisters and one brother". Who is "She"? Phoolan Devi or Phoolan Devi's mother?
    changed Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who offered ₹100". In Englis please.
    I'll answer this one with the query below about currency Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    added conversion Mujinga (talk) 17:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in Phoolan Devi being ordered by his wife". I think it would be clearer if "his" was replaced by a name.
    added Kailash Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A power struggle within the gang started when ... when they rejoined the gang a power struggle ensued". Is it possible to avoid the repetition?
    good spot! rejigged Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The following year, she returned to Behmai with her gang on 14 February 1981." You don't need "The following year" and "14 February 1981". Perhaps mention the year in the first sentence in the section?
    rejigged Mujinga (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "one Other Backward Class" is not grammatical. Maybe 'and one member of Other Backward Class group' or similar.
    hopefully AryKun could give an opinion here since we discussed how to place OBC in a sentence Mujinga (talk) 17:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Mujinga I'd go with "and one member of Other Backward Classes" since that's how the term's usually used. AryKun (talk) 17:35, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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]
  • "Umed Singh announced before Phoolan Devi's terahvin". Perhaps "before" → 'at'?
    it's before in the sense of before it happened, not "in front of" Mujinga (talk) 16:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Ok. (Maybe 'prior to'?)
sure! Mujinga (talk) 18:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • See MOS:CRORE, in particular "Sometimes, the variety of English used in an article may suggest the use of a numbering system other than the Western thousands-based system. For example, the Indian numbering system is conventionally used for certain things (especially monetary amounts) in South Asian English. This is discouraged in Wikipedia articles by WP:Manual of Style § Opportunities for commonality."
  • Also see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Currencies, in particular "Generally, use the full name of a currency, and link it on its first appearance if English-speakers are likely to be unfamiliar with it (52 Nepalese rupees); subsequent occurrences can use the currency sign (just 88 Rs)."
    To answer this one and the one above, the currency conversion gives the pound sterling amout and using that system I don't see a way to use Indian rupees on first mention instead of ₹ Mujinga (talk) 17:39, 26 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
  • "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

  • 25 citations of the Sen book without page numbers is not satisfactory. It is curious that the book is available for a nominal price on Amazon UK but is expensive on Amazon India. Dudley Miles (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Dudley Miles page numbers for Sen are all in text, using the "rp" system Mujinga (talk) 17:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for explainiing. I see there is an error message in the Behmai massacre section. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BennyOnTheLoose

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]

Comment by Dwaipayan

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

  • 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]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Phoolan_Devi/archive1&oldid=1184825549"