Template:Did you know nominations/Sister Gargi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:28, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Sister Gargi[edit]

Created/expanded by Titodutta (talk), Ekabhishek (talk), TheMandarin (talk). Nominated by Titodutta (talk) at 03:36, 9 June 2013 (UTC).

Article listed as a stub... ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 12:58, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay, good. Also... The subsection "Books on Swami Ashokananda" reads a bit awkwardly and some sentences are uncited (last para). ☯ Bonkers The Clown \(^_^)/ Nonsensical Babble ☯ 13:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Added source, copyedited. --TitoDutta 20:19, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I have added to the article so that it now meets the 5x expansion requirement (it was a 4.5x expansion when I found it). I don't think the two hooks are particularly interesting to an audience that doesn't know who Swami Vivekananda was. I am one of those ignorant people, but when I read the article I was intrigued by the fact that Sister Gargi was an American woman who was drawn into Hinduism and made significant scholarly contributions. I wanted to know more about her, but the article says almost nothing about her. Her book A Disciple's Journal is apparently autobiographical, at least in part, and probably contains some of the information I was hoping to find in the article. Snippets of information in various online sources (but nothing I would use in an article, because the basis is so weak) suggest that she was wealthy, married, and a professional writer before she began her new life. Anyway, I suggest the following variant as a somewhat more interesting hook:
The article is still somewhat awkwardly written, but I think we can live with it for DYK. Someone else will need to review this due to my involvement with the article. --Orlady (talk) 17:50, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm working on the review now. Orlady's work has certainly bumped it up past the 5x expansion mark. I'm checking for signs of close paragraphing and noticed that ref #7 to vivekananda.net is dead. It doesn't seem to be needed since the claim in the lead that it serves as a reference for is adequately source by Chaturvedi Badrinath's book in footnote #6. I would recommend removing the dead link or fixing. AgneCheese/Wine 02:12, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
  • For Alt 3- The one dead link is not serious enough of a concern to hold up the nomination and the article passes all other DYK criteria for length, date and referencing with no sign of close-paraphrasing or plagiarism. I added Orlady to the credit line. AgneCheese/Wine 02:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)