Template:Did you know nominations/Witch-hunts in Nepal

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:29, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Witch-hunts in Nepal

(
)
  • Reviewed: Unqualified (my first DYK). Will review others' once I know I did this one right. Update: Went ahead and reviewed Social media addiction anyway.
  • Comment: Moved to mainspace on 29 June.

Moved to mainspace by Usedtobecool (talk). Self-nominated at 22:07, 2 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Substantial and interesting article--it might take me a bit of time to review this. Drmies (talk) 15:24, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • It's long enough, it's new enough, and so far all I've seen is well-verified--though I am waiting to hear from Randykitty about the reliability of the journal cited in note 1. But here is the thing: the article needs cleanup. I suspect that the citations were done by a bot: they show all the hallmarks thereof, including, for instance, citing news sources with a "cite web" template. That means, for instance, that citations from The Kathmandu Post are rendered with "website=http://kathmandupost.ekantipur.com", which is ugly and useless, rather than (properly italicized automatically" "newspaper=The Kathmandu Post". So these need to be cleaned up, with "cite news" just to be on the safe side. In addition, many citations need other forms of cleaning up--there are names in all caps, organizations names need to be filled in (and again, those URLs instead of names need to be handled), dates are missing (see note 7, "Which is witch"), etc. I've done some copyediting but more needs to be done.

    Finally, the hook is mostly fine--except for the "dragged from her home" part, which isn't in the Kathmandu Post article, and the My Republica article is so poorly written that it's not clear from that as well. I wonder if it wouldn't be a stronger hook if that cop who got fired was put in there. Drmies (talk) 15:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Hello Drmies Thank you very much for taking the time reviewing (and improving the article), and for these wonderful notes, both here and in the article. These are just the sort of insights I hoped to gain about writing/editing in Wikipedia from this exercise. I am very much curious about the reliability of that article as well. I only used it since it could do no harm regarding the content (as I already know the claims made are factual). I will consult the citation guidelines and improve them all. I will also read your comments carefully and try to follow their suggestions as best I am able to understand them. It's 2325 hours here right now. So, I'll do these things in the next couple of hours before going to bed. You are welcome to review my changes again and leave me a note after a few hours, which I will be able to see and make use of in the morning. Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 17:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • About the hook, I just picked one I found interesting. As I said, my primary goal was to learn even by failure (although preferably by success). I will suggest a few others after I'm done addressing the primary issues you highlighted. Though I fear, I might need you to substantially modify them or even suggest new ones that you think best, if we are to actually be able to take it to the main page. Thanks again! Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 17:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Usedtobecool, no rush. The hook is fine except for her being dragged from her home. Look at the sources again, maybe, to see what else you can pull from the sources. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:42, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
Hey! Looks like this was the piece I got that "dragged from home" part from. I have expanded the section with further updates, including the suspension, all sourced, of course.
  • ... [the old one]? with the added source that mentions "dragging from home". (not sure about the source, its a french one.)
  • ... that there were 89 reported incidents of witch-hunt related violence against women in Nepal in 2014 alone? (only one source, but is a very respected one in Nepal)
  • ... [your suggestion about cop] I've added the police suspension to the article but can't think of an accurate description of the circumstances for a hook.
  • ... that a women's rights activist in Nepal was accused of being a witch and assaulted in her own home by a group including a police officer?
  • ... that a widow in Nepal was accused of witchcraft and burned alive by a mob led by her own relatives, in front of her nine-year-old daughter?
In almost all of these, I find it difficult to accomodate the article's title as is, so it would have to be linked with some other phrase; is that allowed? Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 10:27, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Drmies, I think I've addressed your concerns. Did you get to check it yet? Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 14:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I am still seeing small things, but there is enough progress, and it's clean enough, to go to the front page. More copy edits are always welcome. I checked maybe half, maybe more than half of the individual sections and have found no problems (with either plagiarism or the BLP). Drmies (talk) 15:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Witch-hunts_in_Nepal&oldid=1022918877"