- The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 02:02, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Mirza Adeeb
edit- ... that the actual name of the Pakistani Urdu-dramatist Mirza Adeeb was "Syed Dilawer Hussain Ali"?
- Reviewed: Sardar Ayaz Sadiq
Created/expanded by Syed Wamiq Ahmed Hashmi (talk), Faizan (talk). Nominated by Faizan (talk) at 10:48, 8 June 2013 (UTC).
Oh dear. I'm going to have to turn this down unless substantial revisions are done. First things first: the proposed hook has punctuation errors (that's minor) and is, well, very unexciting (that's not minor). The article needs a ton of work. It's long and new enough, but it's not good enough. I made a quick edit to the lead to indicate how much needs to be done. For instance, the headings are incorrect: "Prose career" is a high-level section under which drama is subsumed; that whole section needs to be retitled, with individual sections combined. And the "Style" section is very unconventional (really, odd--a list of plus and minus points?) and unverified. One of the awards is unverified. The "Notes" are not conducive or done according to our MOS and other guidelines, esp. in reference to other Wikipedia articles.Much of this can be taken care of with normal editing and proofreading, I have no doubt, but it will take a bit work. Also, why is "Urdu" the first word of all citations to books? Except for the one whose first word is "10"? Drmies (talk) 00:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Doing... Thanks for your review! I thought no one will ever see my nomination... As to the problems with what you have pointed out, I am going to rectify them. And as to the name of the books, I want to tell you that the second part of their names was Urdu, which is displayed first there. Hope its clear? Now as to the Style section, It is not unverified, I got it from a lengthy essay in one of the sources... I did not deem it appropriate to add the same citation at each point, so I just put it once in the beginning.—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 10:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Drmies. I have fixed the punctuation errors. The sections have been renamed to better titles. As far as "Style" section is concerned, It is in accordance with MOS at other playwrights, see Shakespeare. But here, the problem was the division of points into positive and negative. I have combined then under a section as per the Shakespeare article. The major problem we have here is that, we have very few online references. And even those online, are not biographical, rather they are his books or plays. We have references through offline books only. The "Style" section is also from one of these books from our "library", but not unverified. The notes have been removed. The titles of the references have been fixed too. NOw minor edits on the way. Faizan 15:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Major issues seem to have been addressed. Looks good to go in my opinion. Mar4d (talk) 13:15, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
I have pulled this one from the queue (#6) because the hook is substandard - there is nothing remotely unusual about an author having a pen name. The hook isn't even cited in the article. Also, the ar
ticle was double-linked in the hook. Gatoclass (talk) 16:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
- Doing... Fixing the addressed issues... But do you have some other better hook in your mind?—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 17:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC) :::Thank you for pointing out the problem. But I think you did not see the citations; there are two citations just after the parantheses →[3][4]. —Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 17:25, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
- The phrase "he came to be known as Mirza Adeeb" is uncited, therefore the hook is uncited. And no, I don't have an alt to suggest right now. What does Mirza Adeeb mean exactly? Gatoclass (talk) 06:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- It is from the same source which mentions his alternate name... And it means exactly what I have put up there.—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 06:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Prince Writer—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 07:31, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, do you have a cite for the fact that his pen name means "Prince Writer"? How did he come to have this pen name? We might be able to construct a hook around that. Gatoclass (talk) 07:39, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- Good idea! I will try to get a good source giving the reason...—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 07:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- The name Adeeb is a Muslim baby name. In Muslim the meaning of the name Adeeb is: Scholar. LittErateur.. And the references on the article of Mirza gives the meaning as "high nobleman or Prince". Faizan 13:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- Good idea! I will try to get a good source giving the reason...—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 07:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- On reflection, I don't think that angle is going to work, so I will suggest an alt instead:
- ALT1: ... that Mirza Adeeb was a prominent modern Pakistani Urdu playwright whose later work focuses on social problems and daily life? Gatoclass (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- ✔ I support the 2nd Alternate hook. It may be quite more interesting than the previous one. Faizan 15:52, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- This hook actually does sound more interesting than the previous one.—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 16:53, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- Nevertheless, how about this?
- ALT2: ‘... that Mirza Adeeb was a prominent Pakistani Urdu playwright who worked as romanticist, later switching to commonplace events?—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 16:53, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- Too many clauses. Try phrasing it so the hook isn't "x was". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- You should take one more look at the article, guys. I'm seeing a signature in the lede. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
- You can't approve this, as you are a nominator. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Actually I had inted a "fixed" template. Faizan 09:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- You also inserted File:Symbol voting keep.svg, which is an approval tick. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:17, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah because that is the similar image, as compared to the one used for "fixed" template. My regrets. Faizan 09:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Alright. Now, regarding the hook... I'm concerned ALT2 has too many clauses. Can you make this a bit tighter? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:24, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- I have done a few things. Feel free to amend it Crisco. Faizan 09:27, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Issues; one cannot "work as a romanticist". I was thinking more along the lines of '... that prominent Pakistani Urdu playwright Mirza Adeeb began his career as a romantic, but later switched to commonplace events? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah because that is the similar image, as compared to the one used for "fixed" template. My regrets. Faizan 09:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- Actually I had inted a "fixed" template. Faizan 09:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I agree, too.—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 10:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Alright, looks good to go now. Reinstating tick. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know which alt you are ticking here, but neither alt2 nor alt3 are clear enough in meaning in my view. Gatoclass (talk) 18:33, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- ALT3, sorry. Any suggestions? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
- This is the ALT3 hook:
- ALT3: ... that prominent Pakistani Urdu playwright Mirza Adeeb began his career as a romantic, but later switched to commonplace events? Faizan 07:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
- And the hook proposed by Gatoclass was:
- ALT1: ... that Mirza Adeeb was a prominent modern Pakistani Urdu playwright whose later work focuses on social problems and daily life?
Upon reflexion, it seems to me that both of these fit well. Anyone can be promoted.—Шαмıq ☪ тαʟκ✍ @ 15:20, 20 June 2013 (UTC)