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) 16:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
How is India's domination of the ridge interesting? If anything, I will have the hook focus on the fact that the forces were fighting with primitive weapons! Though arguably, one can argue that the appropriate article for such a hook will be the treaty. TrangaBellam (talk) 13:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
TrangaBellam, it's intriguing in several different ways, and to a diverse audience. First, in the sense that the ridgeline essentially forms the frontier between the two sides in the region where the clash occurred, and a layman reader would not expect something that falls on the border to be in control of a solitary contender (especially, where there are competing claims). They would ideally expect it to be a no-man's land. Second, because both sides have competing claims to the ridge, the fact that India has been able to enforce hers in the face of Chinese aggression is noteworthy, as it is often perceived as the underdog in the larger border dispute. Third, avid military readers are often interesting in the relief in such terrains: so which side controls the high ground becomes a matter of great significance, for its inherent military advantages, so that's also there. India's occupation of the ridge has also become a bone of contention between the two armies, so methinks all of this could generate interest amongst potential readers, and ergo drive traffic to the page. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 14:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Yes, border ridges have been bones of contention between India and China for a long time, e.g., Nathu La and Cho La clashes.
I prefer "dominates" to "controls". Each party controls its side of the ridge. So, "controls" doesn't make sense. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, that's my stated position too. India 'dominates' is apt and verifiable. Everything else is self-explanatory (that India maintains its hold over the high ground that the Chinese covet). MBlaze Lightning (talk) 15:51, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Note, I have changed the phrase "border ridge" to "very high-altitude border ridgeline" in the hook for clarity and precision. Troop tussle at such high altitudes adds another element of appeal for the readers (thereby adding to its noteworthiness). It is also consistent with the facts that occur in the article and the richly illustrated, scholarly article provided above (or tap here). TrangaBellum may want to have a relook and note if they concur. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 21:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
I proffer an alternative to the main hook, transcribed in a pithy, straightforward, and yet provocative style, likely to entice the audience into reading the article to discover more about the incident:
ALT1 seems pretty complicated and I don't think the mentions of the high elevation or ridgeline are necessary. Maybe just mention the hand-to-hand combat? I don't think most readers these days would associate troops with hand-to-hand combat so that may be a better angle to focus on. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, makes sense, although doing away with the last clause regarding ridgeline forming the frontier seems more proper for the purpose to me. And while a hook encompassing just the melee information would be appealing on its own, I felt a few extra words touching on the aspect of high altitude could more accurately encapsulate the plight of the men that fought in such extremities. But if the consensus is to omit it, then consider the following alt2 hook.