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 asthis nomination's talk page,the article's talk page orWikipedia 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:rejected by reviewer, closed byLaunchballer talk 07:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that post enforcement ofWomen's Reservation Bill in India in the next few years, 33% of womenMPs will be required althoughnew Lok Sabha has only 14%?

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}03:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC).General eligibility:[reply]

• New enough:
• Long enough:
• Other problems:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free ofcopyright violations,plagiarism, andclose paraphrasing:
• Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems:

Overall: Approved only for ALT hook proposed by me.Mehedi Abedin (talk)11:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Dharmadhyaksha andMehedi Abedin: The article has a citation needed tag and needs copyediting for sentences such as "Parents of Choudhary and Sarojs have been MPs/MLAs and of Jatav have been deputy sarpanch", "The 14% strength of women in Lok Sabha is considerably short", etc.~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk)07:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @AirshipJungleman29: The tag wasn’t' there when I was inspecting the article as a reviewer. Also the article was good to me in that time and it was edited many times by many users and ip after review.Mehedi Abedin11:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• CN tag is sorted by some editor.@AirshipJungleman29: What do you want those two sentences to be written as? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}07:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I think this needs to be rephrased. '33% ofMPs will be required to be women althoughnew Lok Sabha has only 14%?' It's33 percent of MPs are mandated to be women, not33 percent of women MPs; there is a fundamental difference.Will Thorpe (talk)02:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks@Willthorpe:! ALT1 & 2 have suggested now.@AirshipJungleman29:, your response is also awaited. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}03:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worriesDharmadhyaksha, glad to help!Will Thorpe (talk)03:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This hook feels really wordy, which is why I think it hasn't been promoted yet. Is there any way to trim it a bit? What about this? ♠PMC♠(talk)02:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3 ... that althoughthe Indian Constitution has required 33% ofMPs to be women since 2023, theLok Sabha formed in 2024 has only 14%?

@Premeditated Chaos: Well, ALT3 will be factually incorrect as the Reservation Bill is not really implemented yet. It was passed in 2023 and the date of implementation is yet to be decided as therewill be delimitation of constituencies after thenext Census is completed. Both these major steps (census & then delimitation) are still pending. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}07:25, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So wait, basically the hook is that the percentage of female MPs is less than what's mandated by a law that isn't even in force yet? I'm not sure I find that particularly surprising or intriguing. ♠PMC♠(talk)19:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.... its way less that what would be required by maybe next elections. I understand the hook is becoming un-interesting as we are being factually correct. Hence i was using "will be required" and skipping the part of "when will it be required". If you have any other suggestions, we can think of those too. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}03:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dharmadhyaksha andPremeditated Chaos: how's anALT4: ... that India will need to more than doubleits current number of women in Parliament under a new law?theleekycauldron (talk • she/her)04:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. In fact, much better than what i had framed. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}05:25, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dharmadhyaksha "The 14% strength of women in Lok Sabha is considerably short than the 33% which will be required after the Women's Reservation Bill, 2023 is enforced after the delimitation of constituencies happens post this 2024 elections." That sentence doesn't make much sense without context. Consider rewording it to flow better like the original proposed hooks.PrimalMustelid (talk)15:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimalMustelid: Sentence has been reworded. Please check and if such minor edits are required, request you to use your discretion underWP:BOLD and do it yourself. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}06:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: Have your concerns been resolved?@Mehedi Abedin: as the original reviewer can you ensure that this article is approved again, or post below what else needs to be done?Z1720 (talk)19:49, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Y Looks like there is no issue now. The new hook is okay.Mehedi Abedin21:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged one section as needing copyediting; I'll try to remember to get around to doing it myself tomorrow.~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk)23:13, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it needs copyediting, let's not give it a tick yet. Noting thatMehedi Abedin used a non-standard non-substituted tick icon that the bot doesn't understand; please use the standard icon codes located above the edit window in order to properly approve a nomination. Many thanks. Also pingingAirshipJungleman29, in case they want to add that approval icon after the copyedit is completed.BlueMoonset (talk)02:44, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Waiting for the completion of copyedit. After that I will give tick.Mehedi Abedin03:32, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This has been open for almost two months. The copyedit was in July and hasn't happened yet. Just foreshadowing that I'm about to close this nomination as unsuccessful.Schwede6622:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyediting tag was placed on last day of July!! Its been only 5 days since then. And why do we have so many bosses at DYK these days who are actually not helping the nomination in any way? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§{Talk /Edits}05:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We have too many nominations and try to get rid of stuff that's stale. This is the oldest open nomination. If you get on with it, then all's good.Schwede6606:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination is two months old and so I amtiming it out. You will have another chance at this if you can get this throughWP:GA.--Launchballer07:53, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]