Talk:Preet Chandi

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 10:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Preet Chandi
Preet Chandi

Created by Cbderbylib (talk), Kaybeesquared (talk), SanjitChudha (talk), Mmberney (talk), and Victuallers (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 20:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article meets DYK requirements and a QPQ has been provided. I like the original hook the best because it's the most easily readable; hook is cited inline and verified. While Earwigs detected a match with this site, it's only due to the block quotes in the article, which are properly cited. My only concern is that ALT0's wording doesn't exactly match the article text: the hook says that she was the first woman of color to walk solo to the South Pole, but the article instead states that it is "believed" that she is the first to do so. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • try this source instead which clears up the doubt... or I suggest that the journos did only believe this to be true but surely after this claim has been made and no one has contested it then it would seem to me that its veracity is enough for a DYK hook as the article makes the detail clear. If you insist then we could go for Alt2 or 3 which smudge that fact Victuallers (talk) 12:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alt2 ... that while Preet Chandi was (probably) becoming the first woman of colour to walk solo to the South Pole, she was contacting friends to be her bridesmaids?
  • Alt3 ... that while Preet Chandi was contesting to be the first woman of colour to walk solo to the South Pole, she was contacting friends to be her bridesmaids?
  • Alt4 ... that while Preet Chandi was becoming "the first woman of colour to walk solo to the South Pole", she was contacting friends to be her bridesmaids?
The article still says "believed to be the first" and so that will need to be resolved before any hook fact that mentions "first woman of colour to walk solo" is approved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: I have removed the word "believed" from the article and changed the ref to support the statement without that word. It may be useful to note that Black History Month (US version) starts on 1 Feb. Victuallers (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rereading the sources again, they all do say "thought to be the first" (even the CNN source says "believed") and so I think the word believed needs to remain in the hook and the article. I think some variation of ALT0 would work as long as the "believed" part remains. Perhaps reword it to start with something like "that Preet Chandi, believed to be..., contacted friends to be her bridesmaids while on her expedition?" or wording to that effect. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:40, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot see there is a great deal of difference between "probably" in Alt2 and "believed" or alt3 which doesnt even make the claim that she was the first... but you seem very insistant that the word is used. I tried modding the main hook but it is too clunky. Better to leave the claim entirely I think - I have rephrased to the less hooky alt5. Victuallers (talk) 11:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give this a shot since I believe that her being the first woman of colour is central to the hook. Maybe something like this?
ALT6 ... that during her expedition, Preet Chandi, believed to be the first woman of colour to walk solo to the South Pole, was contacting friends to be bridesmaids?
Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK lets go with your hook Victuallers (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the edits. One last thing: the year of birth needs a citation. Some of the articles about her give an age so I think those should work as references. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I thank you for your work, but this is not a GA review. You don't get to spot errors, list them here and get others to fix them for you while you keep the nomination hostage. If you see an error then please just fix it or realise that DYK articles are not perfect but works in progress. If you find another thing that IYO "must be" fixed then please just fix it, ask for another reviewer or just assume this nomination is withdrawn. Victuallers (talk) 17:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a general rule I do not edit myself any article I review as I prefer to be hands-off whenever possible, hence why I didn't edit the article myself. In any case my issues have been addressed so we are now good to go with ALT6. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ALT6 to T:DYK/P4

Alt hook - don't know how to enter it in DYK system -

..that Preet Chandi kept her morale up when walking solo in the Antarctic, with friends' voice messages, and asked her bridesmaids on her blog, almost at the South Pole? Source: search for bridesmaids here Kaybeesquared (talk) 22:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Draft:Preet Chandi into Preet Chandi[edit]

Please compare the draft and the article. Both appear to have been written independently at the same time recording the account of her expedition. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

this makes sense, how does it happen? Kaybeesquared (talk) 13:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh you just do it! feel free to copy stuff from the draft with the refs and acknowledge the source in your edit summary at least. Beware copyvio tho' I found an example of a cut and paste in the article just now. Victuallers (talk) 13:53, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This has now been done and any duplicate citations removed from the mainspace article, other tidying up also done as far as possible, any other copyvio please change. Requesting the draft merger template be removed and earlier draft article now can be deleted or archived if this is appropriate. Many Thanks.Kaybeesquared (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking barriers[edit]

Are there quantifiable citation-supported details regarding how many women, overall, have accomplished the feat, as that could add some weight to it being a significant breakthrough that a woman of colour has finally been able to overcome prejudicial barriers and accomplish it. If she's the fifth woman ever to do it, the real story is still that it is hard for any woman to accomplish the feat, but being the 20th or 40th woman would make it more impactful that she is the first woman of colour. This does not diminish the accomplishment of all 20 or 40, but would add weight to the article's emphasis that Captain Chandi broke through additional barriers that the other 20 or 40 did not have to deal with. Jmg38 (talk) 04:35, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adjusted the layout to get to the point, a little earlier in the flow of the article, about the challenges Captain Chandi has faced related to her colour and heritage. Still helpful if total numbers of woman trekkers were available. Jmg38 (talk) 10:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no doubt that is a hard task that others have already achieved. However from my reading she is demoing that top explorers had a posh education, were white and were blokes. She isn't. So if she is the 400th its still amazing IMO. Victuallers (talk) 18:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - Chandi was reported as being the person who made the point about ethnic background. Not commenting on the linguistic arguments from others on here. Her achievement is notable. Kaybeesquared (talk) 22:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnocentrism[edit]

Woman of colour? What century are we? As opposed to what? White? Why? Are people classified as white and not white in my planet? This is unbelievable. So she is categorized as non white? Are all non white people in one category? Is Wikipedia assuming a whitecentric approach? Finally: In one generation of interracial breeding the children are apparently 'of colour', is the white parent forgotten? Vanished from Earth? Are they so insignificant? Is white race thus related to purity? Then we could say pure/non pure. Pure what? Black? White? Mongolian? Could we then forge a new expression 'of non colour'? Does not, whatever white may mean, white people have a colour? Then what is the meaning of colour in this context? Does a pure black person refers to any non pure black person as a person 'of non colour'? Finally again, in what category am I? I feel like dying, in the hope that next life has to be completely different. This one seems to be just a repeating cycle of absurd. HM7Me (talk) 11:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

obs.: Concerning the frostbite episode. Are not Inuit people, Sami/Laponian, Andes, Himalayan people supposed to have frostbite? They are the explorers of the cold regions. If there is one human authority/reference concerning cold weather I'd suppose it would be these peoples. Are they 'of colour'? HM7Me (talk) 12:17, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

obs.: Is it perhaps the capacity to destroy the whole planet and beyond, through industrialism and capitalism that characterizes this abstract whiteness? European intrinsic misery that pushes its people to spread their diseases, war and famine, and mainly the capitalist/rationalist/anthropocentric greed to all other continents? That would make more sense than a racial abstract criteria. It would make sense that such 'race' would feel the need to distinguish itself as non mixable, and thus exempt itself from all the damage. Thus that would be the main characteristic of this supposed 'race'. To blame others. This is not a race, but a conceptual vehicle of destruction. It is not about white people. A 'white' person is not supposed to carry this burden. Is it possible that a a white person is in him/herself materialistic to a genetic point of determinism? Does it tapers down with mixture or does it disappear completely at the first interbreeding just because the child looks 'of colour', instantly cured of their parent's whiteness? Humanity is not supposed to carry such burden. Not only material destruction but this very concept destroys humanness. Is Wikipedia such vehicle? HM7Me (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is modernity so good a reference? Is consumerist society so good a reference? Is globalization so good a reference? Sexualization of the subconscious and reification of women? Commercialization of all aspects of life? Depression, pandemics? Brutal colonization? This article is conveying the idea that modern/European values liberate and improve peoples lives. The same old discourse. How many atomic bombs will be necessary after Hiroshima and Nagasaki to feed this system of values? HM7Me (talk) 13:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, what would be the relevance in emphasizing her supposed 'of colourness' HM7Me (talk) 14:03, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest a revision attempt to make the article less biased and more objective. And the immediate removal of the racist expression 'of colour'. HM7Me (talk) 14:54, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Two world wars, people dying on an industrial scale of human butchery in the 'developed' continent. Is nonsense the new sense? After centuries of brutal and genocidal colonialism. Piles of European garbage across continents and oceans (aka recycling) and brutally forceful advertisement colonizing and killing the minds with low consumerist brainwash, reducing life to nothing. A humanity enslaved in its essence by technology and marketing. The white European legacy. And I need to read 'of colour' HM7Me (talk) 15:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To further illustrate the point, I may suggest that primitive people in a certain hypothetical non white culture could perhaps write a Wikipedia article about the first white man capable of taking part in an activity that happens in harmony with nature and people instead of destroying them or with an intention at least, if any were able to. And as far as absurd goes, if anyone can make up some convenient existential distinction (such as white/of colour), the idea of this not being my world starts to get more verisimilar and palpable. Because I am absolutely not a part of this nonsense. So I could say 'I am not one of you, worldly people'. Therefore I am dismissed and exempted. Also if anything I say hurts your beliefs you can also use this same argument against me. And perhaps we could also write an article about this first 'non wordly' person who ate a banana and crossed a street simultaneously. Even though we know any non worldly person can do that, I'd be the first who cared to cross a street when I happened to be eating a banana. Or to happen to be wasting my time in a dull town instead of quietly having a pleasant time solo crossing the Antarctica and people 'of worldly skin' wouldn't even notice. HM7Me (talk) 19:32, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps an article about outstanding persons 'of colour' who have also excelled in genocides and torture. HM7Me (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather be a dolphin .. HM7Me (talk) 00:00, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Birth year[edit]

Birth year is reported is 1988/1989 in Derby. It seems surprising that someone could be born in a western country in this day and age without a record, so this deserves explanation. On the other hand many other sources are giving February 7th, 1989 as a definite date so perhaps just a correction is needed. 2001:14BA:A018:3B00:39AF:3483:CE91:582 (talk) 06:39, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Preet_Chandi&oldid=1207408280"