Template:Did you know nominations/Toofan Singh

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Toofan Singh

(

)

~~... that over 400,000 people attended the funeral ceremony of Toofan Singh? Source: "over 400,000 people attended the funeral ceremony of Toofan Singh"~~ (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Comment: Was thinking of nominating it before the expiration of the timestamp.

Created by Harmanprtjhj (talk). Self-nominated at 21:31, 27 January 2019 (UTC).

Review not started

Article has a neutrality tag valereee (talk) 13:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Tag removed because it was not probably a valid one per discussion.[1] Harmanprtjhj (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

It looks valid to me, and should not have been removed by the article's author. I have reverted the removal. The neutrality discussion should take place on the article's talk page. (See Template:POV#When_to_remove.) There is a problem with the hook, in that it is an exact copy of the source's wording as given here. We can't copy without quoting. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:25, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

What about Template:POV#When to use? Where is the discussion? Drive by tagging is not the way. Hook is not the copy of the source. You need to provide evidence of that. It cannot be quoted because it appears to be backed by multiple reliable sources. Harmanprtjhj (talk) 04:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Harmanprtjhj, I looked at the hook, and then the Source quoted right after it, and drew the natural conclusion that the Source was a quote, and the hook echoed the source. What I didn't realize was that you had mistakenly entered the hook in the Source section, and valereee simply copied it into proper hook format while leaving the Source listing intact, making it look like the hook was identical to the Source, which appeared to be a quote from your original entry. I'm sorry the confusion arose.

However, there still appear to be significant issues. With regard to the neutrality, the article includes such sentences as Singh was glorified as a martyr, and poets sang in praise of his bravery. This is a non-neutral sentence in Wikipedia's voice (and rather flowery at that, rather than encyclopedic in tone): there is no explanation of who glorified him nor what poetry or song arose and how extensive it might have been. Context is everything, and crucial here. With regard to the hook, since I don't read the language I put the two sources cited for his funeral through Google translate, and got the following:

From bhaskar.com: It is said that around four lakh people gathered in tribute to him during the funeral.
From aajtak.intoday.in: It is said that four lakh people attended the funeral of Jugraj.

These are very similar, but what struck me is that both sources use wording that translates as "It is said that": in short, they don't know themselves, and are going by numbers of unknown quality or neutrality that may be accurate or may be significantly off in either direction. The article, to reflect the sources, needs to include that qualification, as would the hook. (The "over" with regard to the 400,000 in the hook doesn't appear to be supported, but I'm leery of trusting Google translate to get that level of nuance correct.)

Finally, DYK rules require that none of the source citations be bare URLs. You will need to address that. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

There has been no edits to the article in three weeks to address any of the issues raised above, nor any response here. If more time is needed, please request it here, but we do expect some general progress to be made, and another seven days should be sufficient to see some. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Somewhat busy but I will get back to modifying the article anytime soon. Thanks for the note. Harmanprtjhj (talk) 04:44, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

N This is a stub and there are a multitude of other problems including neutrality. Brazen Khalistani glorification.∯WBG^converse 13:22, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Struck hook for being factually inaccurate. The number of people who flocked at his funeral vary widely and all sources write:-- .... it is said that XXX number of people were present...... This HT piece claims more than 1-lakh. ∯WBG^converse 13:26, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

A full review was never done, so no one noticed before now, aside from the stub comment a couple of days ago, that the article is far too short to qualify for DYK. It's only 1130 prose characters, and the bare minimum is 1500. Given how many issues there are here, including the neutrality issues that have persisted for well over a month and a half, I'm giving this until March 24, two weeks after Harmanprtjhj's most recent post, to see some action in addressing the neutrality and length concerns. I hope to see significant progress by then. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

There was a single edit changing the "Life" section header to "Biography", and that's it. Under the circumstances, and after an extra day, I'm marking this for closure. Should Harmanprtjhj begin work before this closes and post that they intend to address all of the issues in a timely fashion, the review could remain open rather then close. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I've left the nominator a final message, I will close tomorrow if I don't hear back from them. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 15:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

No response from the nominator and they never addressed the issues. Considering the circumstances, I am now closing as unsuccessful; if the nominator decides to return and wish that this be re-opened, they can leave a message at WT:DYK. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:32, 27 March 2019 (UTC)