- 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 Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bengal famine of 1943
... that after the Bengal famine of 1943 was denied by authorities, reports with images of the victims (example pictured) in the English-language paper The Statesman made it known internationally?Source: several
- Reviewed: Springs Mills Building
- Comment: Unusual article, unusual nomination. Please wait with a review until GAR is over. Many more contributors should be mentioned. Reading is tough.
Improved to Good Article status by Lingzhi2 (talk) and Fowler&fowler (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 06:48, 5 October 2019 (UTC).
- Reviewing Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:15, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- I'm sorry Gerda Arendt, I don't see how this meets the criteria. The article was promoted to GA status over 10 days ago. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- Did you even see the discussion on dyktalk? Or know about IAR. I saw this only yesterday, - how could I possibly nominate it in time? It took me additional time to at least read it. I think we may have to change our rules for nominating someone else's work. BlueMoonset, what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- From the talk, by Lingzhi2: ALT1: ... that because the word famine was censored in India, The Statesman simply ran a photo of the victims of the Bengal famine of 1943, informing not only India but the rest of the world of the tragedy? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:40, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
- Bengal famine of 1943 was immediately sent to GAR upon promotion to GA, because of an out-of-process reversion of the promotion, which was in fact done by someone who didn't oppose promotion but thought the review was far too surface.
The the GAR continued to attract constructive comments from the GAR reviewer Vami IV even after that review was technically closed. it would be very difficult to choose which of three points was the actual finish of GA process.My apologies! I thought the GAR was closed a while back, but I was mistaken. I somehow misinterpreted the situation. Now it officially has been closed Please reconsider accepting the DYK nom... and may I suggest reading the "Alt text" option, which is a bit more accurate... ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
- Bengal famine of 1943 was immediately sent to GAR upon promotion to GA, because of an out-of-process reversion of the promotion, which was in fact done by someone who didn't oppose promotion but thought the review was far too surface.
Destitute mother and child, in Bengal Speaks, 1943
Sigh. The image is regarded as "fair use". With another one:
- ALT1... that after the Bengal famine of 1943 was denied by authorities, reports with images of the victims (example pictured) in English-language papers made it known internationally? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
- The Rambling Man, you are welcome to review this, it needs a reviewer with courage (nothing for the faint-hearted), and I think you are not prohibited because the comments so far had only to do with the late nomination date. If not sure, you could offer a review somewhere, which could be summarized here, perhaps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
A new reviewer is requested to give this a look as none of the previous reviewers have returned to the discussion, and TRM did not respond to the ping. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:21, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Nominated about a week late, but given the circumstances (big article, major subject, third-party nominator, not to mention a GA assessment as long as many articles), that doesn't seem like a deal breaker. Long enough, sourced, and with inline citations for a number of sentences that all support the hook fact. QPQ done, and the image is in the public domain. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:49, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
