- 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 PFHLai (talk) 08:49, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Naresh Gaur
edit- ... that Bharatiya Janata Party member of Delhi Legislative Assembly Naresh Gaur is an advocate by profession?
- Reviewed: Cuvier's dwarf caiman
Created by Bill william compton (talk). Self nominated at 05:36, 5 November 2013 (UTC).
Article is new enough and long enough. Citations check out; no copyright issues detected. However, I don't consider the hook to be the least bit "interesting", bearing in mind the vast majority of legislators in parliaments around the world are legal professionals. A better hook might be based on his on-in-four defeat in 2003, or his being a "weaker bet" – although the article needs to be updated for the outcome of the reselection process. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 08:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
- Alt: ... that Bharatiya Janata Party politician Naresh Gaur has lost only once for the Delhi Legislative Assembly?
Alt1: ... that Bharatiya Janata Party may deny ticket to a three-time member of Delhi Legislative Assembly Naresh Gaur for the 2013 state assembly election?Alt2: ... that Bharatiya Janata Party member of Delhi Legislative Assembly Naresh Gaur may not get the party ticket in the 2013 state assembly election?Alt3: ... that Bharatiya Janata Party considers its three-time member of Delhi Legislative Assembly Naresh Gaur a "weaker bet" for the 2013 state assembly election, and may deny ticket to him?- Please suggest a possible alternative if you find all of them uninteresting. Regards. — Bill william comptonTalk 11:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
My personal choice would be Alt3. I'm clearing this one for the queue. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 03:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- Apparently, the party has decided to bet on him. I've updated the article. Another suggestion:
ALT4: ... that though Bharatiya Janata Party found its member of Delhi Legislative Assembly from Babarpur Naresh Gaur a "weaker bet" for the 2013 Delhi state assembly election, it has confirmed his candidature from the same seat?- Ohc, would you please re-review? — Bill william comptonTalk 16:54, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- ALT4 is 219 characters long, well above the 200 maximum. Suggest you try a somewhat shorter variant, possibly:
ALT5: ... that although the Bharatiya Janata Party found Naresh Gaur, its Delhi Legislative Assembly member from Babarpur, a "weaker bet" for the upcoming 2013 elections, it has confirmed his candidacy?
- This version is 194 characters, a bit long, but within the limits. Or you may prefer to create your own. You could change "candidature" to "candidacy" and save another two, but if the latter is uncommon usage in India, the it probably isn't worth it. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
- Your suggestion reads much better. Thanks. I usually take help of online resources to write articles in Indian English, and it appears (with the help of advanced Google search) media outlets from there use this word profoundly. — Bill william comptonTalk 05:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Needs a reviewer to check ALT5. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
ALT5 passes muster, however, the name for the party can be shortened, particularly if the term is piped. I would suggest as another alternative:ALT6: ... that although the BJP found Naresh Gaur, its representative in Delhi from Babarpur, a "weaker bet" for the upcoming 2013 elections, it has confirmed his candidacy?
-- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 03:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- WP:ACRO suggests that "an acronym should be written out in full the first time it is used on a page." "BJP" is a pretty common acronym for the party in the Indian media, but I don't know how many international readers would be familiar with it. — Bill william comptonTalk 06:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm OK with ALT5, but in the interests of keeping the hook short and sweet, I think it's OK to shorten it with a pipe, because it makes it potentially more "interesting" for people to wonder what exactly BJP means. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 09:04, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- I have to agree when you put it this way :-) — Bill william comptonTalk 18:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- So I take it you are OK to go with ALT6? -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 06:53, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
- Completely. — Bill william comptonTalk 08:26, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
- So I take it you are OK to go with ALT6? -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 06:53, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
- I have to agree when you put it this way :-) — Bill william comptonTalk 18:29, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'm OK with ALT5, but in the interests of keeping the hook short and sweet, I think it's OK to shorten it with a pipe, because it makes it potentially more "interesting" for people to wonder what exactly BJP means. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 09:04, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- WP:ACRO suggests that "an acronym should be written out in full the first time it is used on a page." "BJP" is a pretty common acronym for the party in the Indian media, but I don't know how many international readers would be familiar with it. — Bill william comptonTalk 06:54, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- To reiterate, this one is good to go, based on ALT6. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 09:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)