Talk:Janowar

Did you know nomination

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: promoted by SL93 (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that screenplay of Janowar was written based on interviews with eyewitnesses, meet and talk to criminally accused of true crime? Source: Source
  • Reviewed: This is my fifth nomination for DYK. Do I need review?

Created by FaysaLBinDaruL (talk). Self-nominated at 05:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - Yes and no. I'm aware that a film's plot summary is considered implicitly sourced to the film itself, however, in this case the plot summary is so difficult to follow that I'm not sure it could be reasonably called an accurate summary of the film's plot. Furthermore, at least one sentence fails verification: The cast and crew did not leave the house for 10 consecutive days until filming was completed is not the same thing as They stayed in the house for 10 days. [1]
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: - Per [2], there are WP:COPYVIOs of [3] and [4].

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - I do not understand what the second clause of the hook is trying to say.

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @FaysaLBinDaruL: This is my first DYK review, and I was hoping I'd get an easy pass, but in addition to the removal of the copyright violations (which has to happen regardless of DYK) and resolving the misstatement identified above, I don't think I can pass this when the plot summary is written the way that it is. It seems to be a bunch of individual moments from the film, but not presented in a way that a reader can follow, and with enough grammatical errors that many sentences' meanings are unclear. I understand that DYK standards are intentionally not exceptionally high, but content has to be coherent before one can say it is verified or even verifiable, and the plot summary is not coherent. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 14:35, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

• @Tamzin: Thanks for your review. I think most of the copyvio is occured because direct quoted text from those two source. I can rewrite and minimize them. FaysaLBinDaruL (talk) 23:56, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

@Tamzin: Thanks for your review. One of editor removed copyrighted phrases, I remove more direct quote from Critical Response section. Plot has been re-written. Now can you please re-review and check copyvio again. Looking for suggestion too. Thanks again.FaysaLBinDaruL (talk) 03:08, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

@FaysaLBinDaruL: Looks fine in terms of copyvio now, although please be more careful in the future. If at any point in your editing process you are copy-pasting from sources, even if you intend to reword the copy-pasted bit later, you should get out of that habit.

Going forward, I would still like to see the article copy-edited—especially the lede and plot summary—before it's linked from the Main Page. If you don't know someone who can help with a copy-edit, you can request one at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.

I also still don't fully understand the hook. I see the relevant text in the article interviewing the eyewitness, and meeting and talking to the criminals detained in Kashimpur central jail. That's not actually clear on whether he met with the perpetrators of the crime, or some other criminals (which directors are known to do to get "background" understanding), but the cited source clarifies it's the actual perpetrators... except it says "accused". Are they just accused, or have they been convicted? If the former, the article can't call them "criminals"; that's a serious WP:BLP issue. Either way, the hook needs to be reworded. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 21:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

• ALT1: ... that screenplay of Janowar was written based on testimony of eyewitnesses and perpetrators of the "2020 Gazipur gangrape and murder incidence"?

We can select this hook by directly or modifying it. Mehedi Abedin 07:18, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

• New review please. Original reviewer not commented for a month. I have made a copyedit. Struck both hooks as they break NPOV and BLPCRIME. Cowlibob (talk) 11:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Cowlibob: Hmm? I'm still around. I just haven't been asked to review anything since my last comment. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 11:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

• @Tamzin: Hi, I sent a message informing of my drive by copyedit of this article, which was a major issue above but received no reply so I presumed that you had given up reviewing this nomination. Feel free to continue if not. Cowlibob (talk) 13:17, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

  @Cowlibob: Ah, I'd been waiting for a go-ahead to come back and review it. Sorry for the miscommunication! I've copy-edited a bit further, and fixed that factual error I'd identified, plus a subtle related one (one-take shots, not actually single takes; it wouldn't take 10 days to film a 90-minute movie if most of the scenes were done in literally one take). Looks all good to go to me, except that we don't have a hook! Any ideas? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 13:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

ALT2: ... that the 2021 Bangladeshi film Janowar was based on a murder case that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown? Cowlibob (talk) 15:17, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with that hook, but it's not that interesting, so I'm going to proffer an ALT3 here, in line with 0 and 1, and leave it to a different reviewer to consider the hooks.

ALT3: ... that Raihan Rafi, writer and director of the 2021 Bangladeshi film Janowar, interviewed the alleged perpetrators of the quadruple-murder it's based on?

Since the alleged perpetrators aren't named in the article, I don't see any BLP issue with mentioning them, also anonymously, in a hook, as long as we don't assume guilt. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 17:33, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Per Tamzin's review. ALT3 Hook review: meets formatting guidance, short enough, interesting, cited inline, NPOV. Cowlibob (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)