Talk:Bulandshahr: Or, Sketches of an Indian District

Did you know nomination

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 Valereee (talk) 00:45, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Bulandshahr; or, Sketches of an Indian district; social, historical and architectural was an encouragement of native Indian autonomy? Source: [1]
  • Reviewed: Paige Niemann
  • Comment: still have to go through a few times but review can be done in interim. will complete a qpq soon

Created by Whispyhistory (talk). Self-nominated at 20:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bulandshahr; or, Sketches of an Indian district; social, historical and architectural; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• ALT1 ... that the British Indian government banned Frederic Growse's book Bulandshahr; or, Sketches of an Indian district for praising indigenous architecture? Philafrenzy (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

• Length, date, qpq, close paraphrase ok. But regarding the hooks neither original hook nor ALT1 is clearly supported by text in article. It says further publications of the book was banned, but presumably the copies of the first edition weren't illegal to possess or trade. Perhaps if the two sentences "The British Raj responded by considering the work an encouragement of native Indian autonomy.[6] Following initial release of the book, further publications were banned" could be more clearly linked, it would be evident why further publications were banned? --Soman (talk) 13:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for reviewing @Soman:... will address shortly. Whispyhistory (talk) 05:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

• @Soman:.... If you are still okay to complete review, I have been through. ALT1 should be okay now unless anyone has another hook. Source page 1. Whispyhistory (talk) 06:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

How about ALT2 after Frederic Growse's book Bulandshahr; or, Sketches of an Indian district was published, the British Indian government banned further publishing of the book? --Soman (talk) 13:28, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

@Soman:, is there anything you object to about ALT1 following Whispyhistory's recent revisions? Philafrenzy (talk) 21:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

The issue is that the article and source talks about further publications being banned, not that the book itself would have been banned. --Soman (talk) 21:59, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

• ALT3 ... that the British Indian government banned new editions of Frederic Growse's book Bulandshahr; or, Sketches of an Indian district because they felt it praised indigenous architecture? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
• ALT4 ... that Frederic Growse's book Bulandshahr; or, Sketches of an Indian district annoyed the British Indian government so much that they only allowed one edition? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

• for both ALT3 and ALT4, with my preference being ALT3. --Soman (talk) 14:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

If we need a shorter ALT3 we can just have "for praising indigenous architecture" without the need for more ticks. Philafrenzy (talk) 08:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

• Came to promote, but I'm filling the bottommost queue and I quite like ALT4 for the quirky, which I'd like to leave open. If someone pings me I'll promote when this becomes the second-bottom queue. Valereee (talk) 19:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)