This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Talim (textiles) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Textile Arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of textile arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Textile ArtsWikipedia:WikiProject Textile ArtsTemplate:WikiProject Textile ArtsTextile Arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
A fact from Talim (textiles) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 February 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Talim encodes intricate patterns for Kashmir shawls and carpets?
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.
Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 02:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Article was created on the 16th, so is new enough. At ~2700 characters, it is long enough and reads neutrally. Quite a lot of expansion of the article is available, considering the crowding of sources, but that can be a future endeavor. The hook is the confusing part. There's no direct language about a coded language or secret language in the article, including where the given source is used. And since the hook needs to have said citation in the same sentence it is used in, that's something that needs to be fixed before this nomination can be approved. Other than that, I think the conciseness of Alt1 is better. And the QPQ has been done. The only thing waiting here is to have the hook info and reference actually directly used in the article in some manner. Can you fix that, RAJIVVASUDEV? SilverserenC 18:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Silver seren Thanks for the review. I have added ALT2 and the required citations : 34 as well. Regards RV (talk) 04:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Alt2 is necessary. The text doesn't have to be exactly what's used in the article, just close enough and with the in-line citations. So I still think Alt1 is valid and is more interesting. Are you okay with that? SilverserenC 04:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Silver seren Yes, I am okay with ALT1 as it reads. Regards RV (talk) 04:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Approve ALT1 Okay, everything looks good to go. SilverserenC 04:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Article was created on the 16th, so is new enough. At ~2700 characters, it is long enough and reads neutrally. Quite a lot of expansion of the article is available, considering the crowding of sources, but that can be a future endeavor. The hook is the confusing part. There's no direct language about a coded language or secret language in the article, including where the given source is used. And since the hook needs to have said citation in the same sentence it is used in, that's something that needs to be fixed before this nomination can be approved. Other than that, I think the conciseness of Alt1 is better. And the QPQ has been done. The only thing waiting here is to have the hook info and reference actually directly used in the article in some manner. Can you fix that, RAJIVVASUDEV? SilverserenC 18:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
