Talk:Niwar (cotton tape)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Bruxton (talk) 23:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • General eligibility:
  • New enough: No - The article was not expanded 5x; it looks like it's just under 4x
  • Long enough: Yes
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: No - As is, the hook doesn't sound particularly interesting. I would rewrite the hook to generate interest.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: As it stands, the article is not eligible for DYK. To qualify for DYK, the article should be at least 15,215 bytes in size (using the article's size based on the edit before expansion, 3,043 bytes, as the basis for this computation); the article is currently at 11,942 bytes. --Sky Harbor (talk) 15:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sky Harbor, DYK measures prose characters, not bytes. According to DYK check, which is the gold standard for DYK size checks, this article had 3810 prose characters as of when you reviewed it, and Assuming article is at 5x now, expansion began 65 edits ago on December 28, 2022, which was three days before. Indeed, the nominator notes this in their nomination. (Prior to the expansion, it had 530 prose characters, so only 2650 prose characters were needed to qualify.) It appears that RAJIVVASUDEV needs to create a new hook; what they don't need to do, although it is welcome, is to further expand the article for DYK purposes. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BlueMoonset, Sky Harbor, thanks for your reconsideration. Kindly check the ALT1 if it suits. Regards RV (talk) 05:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The hook does seem better, so I think this is good to go with ALT1. --Sky Harbor (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sky Harbor, RAJIVVASUDEV, I have some concerns about ALT1. The first is the "cotton tape" assertion, as the article makes it clear that Niwar is a type of tape or ribbon that is now manufactured using materials such as cotton, polyester, and nylon, not just cotton alone as the hook states, even if it may originally have only been made from cotton. Further, while some Niwar has historically been produced by prisoners, the article says was produced in various parts of India by cottage industries and also in jail industries, so not ever only by prisoners. The hook needs to be more accurate if it's to run. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sky Harbor, BlueMoonset, ALT2 added. Thanks RV (talk) 08:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RV, I'm afraid that ALT2 is also problematic: it is saying that the niwar bed, according to Sikhism, is both superior and the bed itself "attributes life's injustices to man's acts, not God's caprice", which seems unlikely. The words in quotes are nearly identical to the header immediately before XVI in Macauliffe's The Sikh Religion, and might be better as a direct quote and a better attribution, as these are from the writings of Kabir—based on what I'm seeing in the entire section, each header before the subsection numbers seems to be a brief explanation of what the section is conveying to the reader. The connection in the article is also not obvious between the niwar bed and the rest of it, just that the bed is used, along with silk and satin, as an example of luxuries that the gods might give to someone while others have not even a ragged coat or any bed, with the underlying thought that it all goes away when one dies. I'm not clear where those pre-number header lines come from: are these Macauliffe's summation, or a summary or header in the original Kabir? Finally, "niwar" is not a proper noun as best I can determine from the sources, and should not be capitalized in the hooks or in the text of the article, except as the first word in a sentence; I have adjusted the article accordingly, lowercasing a number of non-proper nouns. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueMoonset Thanks, Kindly check ALT3 and ALT4. Regards RV (talk) 09:17, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RAJIVVASUDEV and BlueMoonset: I've removed the bit about life's inequality and God's caprice from the article, so I've struck ALT3 and ALT4 as no longer usable. Also, some parts of the article are poorly sourced, eg. the "Present" section is sourced to raw export data and the third paragraph of the "Applications" section is sourced to invitations to tender. There may be close paraphrasing issues; compare the passage beginning "In 1956, approximately 215 units..." with this source (p. 147, 2nd paragraph). I'm not sure if this is a problem – the source may be public domain, or this may be a permissible WP:LIMITED exeption – but flagging it just in case. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 17:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sojourner in the earth and BlueMoonset: After copy editing as per the given comments, ALT5 has been added. Please advise. Thanks RV (talk) 19:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note that there are two bare URLs (currently references 11 and 26) that will have to be filled in before the article can be approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:43, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@BlueMoonset: It is sorted. Thanks RV (talk) 04:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @RAJIVVASUDEV: I like ALT5. Could you please add citations to the end of each sentence with the information cited in the hook, even if it breaks your article's citation style? It's required under DYK rule #3b: Each fact in the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact. Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient. This rule applies even when a citation would not be required for the purposes of the article. (I like ALT6 a bit less, mainly because the use of the world "fueled", while attention-getting, sounds odd in wikivoice, plus it could be read the wrong way (i.e., was someone burning niwar in the 20th century?). Cielquiparle (talk) 08:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Hi! Inline citation is there, and page 129 of the source [Survey report: Cottage And Small Scale Industries of India] reads Niwar Weaving: It is another allied industry of weaving. Practically in all cities manufacture of Niwar is very common. Coloured and plain Niwar is prepared and sold almost everywhere. Coarse yarn is mostly used for this article and this industry may, therefore, be a help in the production of hand-spun yarn. During the War this industry was given a good impetus and we hope it will pay if an enquiry be made as to the purpose this article can serve in the foreign market. There seems to be thus a possibility of establishing an export market. To improvise AL6, I have tweaked it [ALT7, ALT8]. Kindly have a look. Thanks 02:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
@RAJIVVASUDEV: Sorry if it wasn't clear...what the rule is saying is that every single sentence in that paragraph has to have an individual footnote at the end of the sentence. You can't just tack it on at the end of the paragraph, even if that is the citation style you have chosen for the page. (I found this very unclear as well but apparently that is what rule #3b means.) Cielquiparle (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: I have fixed it. Have a look. Thanks RV (talk) 03:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RAJIVVASUDEV: This is a nice article topic by the way. I have one more request regarding sourcing for the hook: Is there an additional source you can find that is more recent, which supports the part of the statement that says it helped support handspun yarn manufacturers? The issue I'm having is that the source you are quoting says "the industry may...be a help in the production of hand-spun yarn" (so it's like it hasn't happened yet). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:15, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle: I couldn't find another source, so I'm adding ALT9 and ALT10 if they can work. Thank you RV (talk) 06:41, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Approving ALT9. Can no longer see past ALT1, but this wording doesn't suggest it was only made in jails. (Am unable to access the source for ALT10, so not commenting on that one for now.) Cielquiparle (talk) 21:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Niwar has also been produced in Jails as well as the cottage industry. Thanks RV (talk) 03:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RAJIVVASUDEV: I hate to nitpick but each paragraph needs a citation somewhere in it supporting the content, and there's a few short paragraphs/standalone sentences that lack citations (like the last short paragraph in the "Significance" section and the introductory paragraph for the "Applications" section. Would you mind adding appropriate citations to those sections so it can be promoted? Thanks. - Aoidh (talk) 20:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: These lines are either opening or closing statements that are referenced in the paragraphs that follow. Anyhow, let me examine them. Thanks RV (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Aoidh: I have added the required citations. Kindly have a look. Thanks RV (talk) 05:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Theleekycauldron and BorgQueen: I'd actually like to defer to one of you on this since I'm not sure if I'm being overly nitpicky here; are those standalone sentences (like the first and last standalone sentences/paragraphs of Niwar (cotton tape)#Production) okay as-is or do they need references? I don't want to be needlessly picky about it if it's not necessary to be. Thanks. - Aoidh (talk) 17:05, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RAJIVVASUDEV and Aoidh: IMO, the first two sentences of the "Production" section should have footnotes, even if they are repeating footnotes from the rest of the section below it. It's just best practice because this is Wikipedia, and you have to assume that other editors down the line may start rearranging this content, and will quickly lose sight of the fact that those two sentences were intended as "opening statements". It would be nice if the final sentence in the Production section also had a footnote as well. Cielquiparle (talk) 02:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle and Aoidh: I have added the required citations. Kindly check. Thanks RV (talk) 11:19, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for addressing that, and sorry if it seems like I'm being unduly picky, but DYK in particular has some rules that are particular about that sort of thing and I wanted to make sure it was all addressed and good to go. - Aoidh (talk) 17:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looking to promote this. I see that "cot" is actually a rope bed. I think folks can make the connection. It appears that AlT9 is the selection and it checks out with the bed. As a matter of style (not DYK requirement) some things suffer from WP:OVERCITE. For instance in "Furniture material and in tents" there are two sentences which have five citations. Several single sentences have three citations. It is also a good practice to follow MOS:LEAD, make the lead a summary/introduction without citations. Bruxton (talk) 23:39, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Niwar_(cotton_tape)&oldid=1207809934"