The following is an archived discussion of Gurudas Banerjee's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s
(talk) page, the nominated article's
(talk) page, or the Did you know(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page.See the talk page guidelines for
(more) information.
The result was: promoted by
Gatoclass (
talk) 04:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC).
Comment: Please run hook on SPECIAL EVENT: February 18 (
Sri Ramakrishna's birthday)
Created/expanded by
Presearch (
talk). Self nom at 20:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
The article is new and long enough (3083 characters), properly sourced, hook meets criteria and the image is in public domain. The QPQ is problematic, I don't see the nominator's review in the linked DYK template.
Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 15:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing! Yes, a reasonable question wrt the QPQ. It was done on my behalf by
User:Titodutta. He offered to do it
HERE (DIFF) Then I asked him how it should be recorded
HERE (DIFF) He advised
HERE (DIFF) to explain this setup if asked, rather than explain it initially, as I had done
HERE. So, that is the situation. As I type, this is the only DYK nom template that links to the
QPQ DYK nom template(pages that cite) or the
QPQ article itself(templates that cite) I saw no DYK guidelines or rules prohibiting one editor doing a QPQ on another's behalf. So while I would have preferred to note this directly up-front, this seems adequate to me. So now what? Do you view this as adequate? Is the hook now ready to go? Thanks again for having reviewed this. --
Presearch (
talk) 16:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
If Tito has consented for his review to be used as a QPQ here, then it's not an issue. I can't access source The story of the Calcutta theatres, 1753-1980 through GBooks, so I'm taking it on AGF. This nomination is good to go.
Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 17:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I do! We have been doing some works on Ramakrishna Vivekananda and this QPQ was a part of it! --
Tito Dutta (
talk) 20:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Just so that there is no confusion regarding this, I think this nomination is good to go.
Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 04:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
The following is an archived discussion of Gurudas Banerjee's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s
(talk) page, the nominated article's
(talk) page, or the Did you know(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page.See the talk page guidelines for
(more) information.
The result was: promoted by
Gatoclass (
talk) 04:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC).
Comment: Please run hook on SPECIAL EVENT: February 18 (
Sri Ramakrishna's birthday)
Created/expanded by
Presearch (
talk). Self nom at 20:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
The article is new and long enough (3083 characters), properly sourced, hook meets criteria and the image is in public domain. The QPQ is problematic, I don't see the nominator's review in the linked DYK template.
Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 15:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing! Yes, a reasonable question wrt the QPQ. It was done on my behalf by
User:Titodutta. He offered to do it
HERE (DIFF) Then I asked him how it should be recorded
HERE (DIFF) He advised
HERE (DIFF) to explain this setup if asked, rather than explain it initially, as I had done
HERE. So, that is the situation. As I type, this is the only DYK nom template that links to the
QPQ DYK nom template(pages that cite) or the
QPQ article itself(templates that cite) I saw no DYK guidelines or rules prohibiting one editor doing a QPQ on another's behalf. So while I would have preferred to note this directly up-front, this seems adequate to me. So now what? Do you view this as adequate? Is the hook now ready to go? Thanks again for having reviewed this. --
Presearch (
talk) 16:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
If Tito has consented for his review to be used as a QPQ here, then it's not an issue. I can't access source The story of the Calcutta theatres, 1753-1980 through GBooks, so I'm taking it on AGF. This nomination is good to go.
Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 17:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I do! We have been doing some works on Ramakrishna Vivekananda and this QPQ was a part of it! --
Tito Dutta (
talk) 20:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Just so that there is no confusion regarding this, I think this nomination is good to go.
Correct Knowledge«৳alk» 04:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)