Talk:Phoolan Devi/GA1

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Larataguera (talk · contribs) 23:40, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article and post an initial review in the next few days. Larataguera (talk) 23:40, 3 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this on and let me know if you need any other sources Mujinga (talk) 11:10, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also I should add my internet access is intermittent for the next week, then back to normal again Mujinga (talk) 11:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This initial review is incomplete, but raises a few things to work on while I continue. At first impression, I think this article can probably pass. I will need time to review more of the sources more thorougly. Larataguera (talk) 21:40, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

Minor note: I think there are a few minor issues with commas that might need attention for FA if that ever comes up. Seems like different people have different ideas about commas anyway...
Agreed - personally I'm unfussed as long as the system is consistent across the article Mujinga (talk) 17:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Broader note: please look through for places where text can be more concise or unnecessary detail can be removed. Sources note that accounts of Devi's life are not always consistent with each other, so excessive detail is an especially bad idea, since we can't be sure of the details anyway!
Throughout: I have noticed that the sources do not tend to call Phoolan Devi just "Devi". This is a common surname adopted by many women in the Northern region when they are married. The sources (ie, Mala Sen; the Telegraph; the Atlantic) use the full name "Phoolan Devi", so I think we should also do this.
Yes it's another thing where the sources are all over the place. Hindustan Times for example here uses Devi. I'm thinking we should compile a list of questions and ask for help at Wikipedia:WikiProject India Mujinga (talk) 18:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Questions:

How to put her name, once first stated

How to put Vikram Mallah's name once stated

Should there be more detail on caste politics and if so, where

Was her political career significant, at least in English-langauge sources there is very little about it

Early life

Done Mallahs were a subcaste of Shudra possibly excessive detail, especially since many readers won't know what Shudra is. Clarify and link, or delete.
Are you familiar with the Indian caste system? I am far from being an expert on this, and I note @DaxServer: previously made an edit which moved some text into a footnote, so perhaps you or DaxServer would be kind enough to suggest what is best here Mujinga (talk) 17:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To add, I linked Dalit and Shudra again. Also DaxServer, maybe you have an opinion on the Vikram Mallah question below? Mujinga (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The footnote helps, but gets lost among the refs at the end of the previous sentence. I think this is clear enough now that you've linked it and if we move the {{efn}} template after the word Shudra. Larataguera (talk) 22:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved footnotes a and b so that they are before the refs and hopefully more noticeable Mujinga (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done successfully plotted to steal -> stole. Also delete They forced Devidin to relinquish the land. (This is implied if the land is stolen).
sure, rejigged Mujinga (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done They continued to harass... pronoun ambiguous
good point, clarified Mujinga (talk) 17:36, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done Back in Gorha Ka Purwa... -> "When she returned home..." or "When she returned to Gorha Ka Purwa..." would be clearer. And then the second son of the village leader -> "The village leader's son..."
Agree on first bit, rejigged. On second bit, is it better to say "the village leader's second oldest son"? I'm not sure if much is gained Mujinga (talk) 17:38, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think individually these questions aren't too important, but generally it's almost always better to use as few words as possible, keep the detail to a minimum, and distill the most important content. Cutting just a few words here and there can make a meaningful difference across the article as a whole. Larataguera (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bandit Queen

Done For reasons that Devi has explained in multiple ways... This says almost nothing. Delete.I
I don't want to delete it, but happy to rephrase. What I was trying to say there is that in every account, including the film, there seem to be different reasons for Babu Gujjar to come and take her away. Not sure if it's worth spelling them all out, but it is worth noting that the different accounts exist. Mujinga (talk) 17:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I wouldn't hold up the review over it. I am suggesting we say in the lead that details in Devi's biographies are sometimes contradictory. If we do that is this still needed? Larataguera (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that a sentence in the lead about unreliability is a good idea, but that would be no reason to delete it here - the lead should summarise the article body so some repetition is fine. Mujinga (talk) 17:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done ...came to seize her... -> When did this happen? Can we start this section with a date? There may be too much detail about the kidnapping. (Especially since the Atlantic says, Phoolan's own accounts have varied significantly. The first sentences could just say: "On [date], a gang of bandits led by Babu Gujjar kidnapped Devi and took her away into the ravines."
I can look into this, I'm not sure if we have a definite date Mujinga (talk) 17:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just a year or her age at the time would suffice to orient the reader at the beginning of the new section. Larataguera (talk) 20:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
sen: july 1979 p70 then 7 july 1979 - vikram kills babu

atlantic: july 1979, when phoolan was 21/22 - doesnt sync with DoB of 1963

autobiog: "monsoon time"

guardian: at age of 20 - clearly wrong

it seems we can say july 1979, so i'll add that

Mujinga (talk) 14:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done ~~Should we be using Vikram Mallah's first name or last name to refer to him? Everyone else is by last name.~~
I'm really not sure if Mallah is a last name or caste designation here, which probably betrays my ignorance. Just had a look for MOS guidance on Indian names but didn't find much. Mujinga (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The sources say Vikram (or frequently, "Vikram Mallah"). My mistake. Striking. Larataguera (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've also seen Vikram Singh Mallah Mujinga (talk) 13:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done Need to clarify how long between her kidnapping and Gujar's death. (Atlantic says 72 hrs)
This is again a fact which has been presented in different scales, from days to weeks. It's tricky that all the accounts diverge! Makes it an interesting to write as encyclopedic entry but I'm sure we can find a solution. Mujinga (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. I would suggest presenting the range of timeframes with a citation for the lower and upper end. So far I've only seen 72 hr. (Atlantic, Guardian, and Mala Sen all say 72 hr.)
sen: 72

atlantic: 72

guardian: 72

autobiog: a few days

szurlej: nodate, follows moxham

moxham: no date

roads&kingdoms: no date

seems reasonable to add 72 hours Mujinga (talk) 14:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
could read a little more straightforward if it said "Three days after the kidnapping", instead of After 72 hours
Speaking through a loudhailer, she demanded that the villagers hand over Shri Ram and Lalla Ram, then her gang went from house to house looting valuables is a comma splice. Use a semicolon. ("...Lalla Ram; then ...")
Done I suggest breaking the "bandit queen" section into subsections. One for the 'Behmai Massacre and one for Surrender. These were both events that received a great deal of publicity and are emphasised in the sources. I think it would make the section easier to navigate.
Yeah it is quite long, I'll have a think about that. Maybe three sections: Banditry / Behmai Massacre / Surrender Mujinga (talk) 17:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done Whilst Devi was on the run, her mother was held for five months in Kalpi prison. Maybe not needed. If it is, it shouldn't be the first sentence of this paragraph, which should have a more general topic sentence
The point of that, maybe it's not clear, is that the mother was held in order to make Devi surrender Mujinga (talk) 16:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not entirely clear, but the main thing is that I want the paragraph to have a clear topic sentence. As it reads now, I expect that paragraph to be entirely about the imprisonment of her mother. A more general topic sentence would be something more like, "Police pursued Phoolan Devi for two years after the Behmai massacre, and eventually negotiated a surrender in 1983." This would set up the paragraph to then provide further detail on the topic of her pursuit and surrender. Larataguera (talk) 17:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
rejigged Mujinga (talk) 19:51, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Political career

Done First paragraph says charges were dropped in 1994. Second paragraph says there were still charges in 1996. Can you clarify if there were two separate sets of charges?
The sources are a right mess with regards to this - it was very hard to work out what was going on and what exactly the charges were, I can take another look Mujinga (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a bit more. The charges were always the same and actually still open when she was assassinated Mujinga (talk) 19:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The courtcase is still going on?!? Mujinga (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done This section is a little unfocussed. The heading is "Political career", but slightly over half the section is about criminal charges from her career as a bandit. Should criminal charges go in the "Bandit Queen" section (maybe a third subsection about criminal charges)? And then the section on political career could be expanded and kept on topic.
My rationale would be to keep it roughly chronological and the criminal charges are a big part of her political career Mujinga (talk) 19:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Popular culture

Done Devi's autobiography I, Phoolan Devi was dictated by her onto tape and then edited into a book which was published first in French and then other... -> "Devi dictated her autobiography, I, Phoolan Devi and it was published in 1996, first in French, and then other..."
changed Mujinga (talk) 16:15, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done ~~Moxham reported that she then renounced Buddhism. redundant from previous sentence. Delete.~~
It's not redundant, because she became Buddhist then recanted Mujinga (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. I misread. Striking. Larataguera (talk) 16:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done In his autobiography (published in 2021), Farrukh Dhondy, the commissioning editor at Channel 4, described how he rushed to Delhi to sign a cheque to get Umed Singh to persuade Devi to drop her complaint. Moxham writes that when Devi discovered Singh had taken this payment, they became estranged, before later reconciling again. Excessive detail?
trimmed Mujinga (talk) 15:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

Done Media theorist Sandra Ponzanesi sees Devi's life as an exemplary case of a postcolonial subject attempting to preserve their agency in the face of an Orientalist gaze. What's that mean exactly? Is it possible to say this simpler language?
How about: Media theorist Sandra Ponzanesi takes Devi as an example of a Third World postcolonial subject who is well aware of the racist and patronising attitudes First World analysts can have of her.
That's clearer. I would link postcolonial only, because of MOS:SEAOFBLUE. I still wonder if there's something more to be said here. Maybe I'll look over that source. But yes, this seems clearer to me and it's probably good enough.
Adjusted, not sure what else to add Mujinga (talk) 14:29, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done Lisa Ray was reported to be the main voice artist... -> "Lisa Ray was the main voice artist". Or, is Lisa Ray's involvement excessive detail? "In 2019 Hossein Martin Fazeli produced a documentary..."
I agree Lisa Ray prob doesnt need a mention, it's just that the documentary seems to have been being made for at least 5 years and still hasn't been released or reviewed, so it's hard to get a year in Mujinga (talk) 20:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok chopped out Ray, said Hossein was developing the docu Mujinga (talk) 14:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please look for more concise wording throughout, wherever possible.

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

Lead:

Done The first sentence should clearly identify the subject. "Phoolan Devi was a bandit leader and member of parliament..." or something like that. Some of the detail in the first paragraph may not belong in the lead at all. Growing up in poverty, the land dispute, and repeated sexual abuse only belongs in the lead to the extent that it is necessary for understanding what makes Devi notable.
Good point on the first sentence, I've changed that. MOS:LEAD says the article should summarise the article body, but of course I'm happy to discuss specific sentences or events. Mujinga (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done The lead should mention the Behmai massacre. This was a very notable event in her life. Behmai massacre also redirects here, so a person arriving from that search term should understand why they are at this page.
Yes definitely - have added Mujinga (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even a little more detail about the massacre may be warranted (when it happened, how many people died). The statement that The Behmai massacre was a controversial event which she claimed not to have organised. only makes sense if we've established that other people claimed that she did command it. Her imprisonment, later legal troubles, and eventual assassination seem to revolve around this event. Larataguera (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is getting better. Can the sentence The 1981 Behmai massacre was a controversial event in which twenty Thakur men were executed be rephrased to clarify how the massacre is related to Phoolan Devi? Maybe "Phoolan Devi faced murder charges for the 1981 Behmai massacre in which twenty Thakur men were executed"? Or "Phoolan Devi allegedly ordered the 1981 Behmai massacre in which..." Larataguera (talk) 02:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes i see what you mean, i tweaked it Mujinga (talk) 14:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

Done It may be worth making a statement (even in the lead) that details about Devi's life are foggy. Partly because of this, it's going to take me a little more time to see what is consistent from one source to another before further comment on verifiability.

As we are finding several situations where sources may contradict each other, perhaps we should repeat this statement from the Legacy section Scholar Tatiana Szurlej notes that the facts presented in these biographies often contradict each other, despite coming from interviews with Devi herself. in the lead. Larataguera (talk) 01:28, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
added to lead Mujinga (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

b. (citations to reliable sources):

c. (OR):

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
Earwig ok. No problems so far.
It is broad in its coverage.
a. (major aspects):

Done I would think some additional information about caste politics could be helpful. One source[1] says she was the first low-caste woman elected to parliament. The context or aims of her political career could be expanded. Right now, the only sentence that does this is Devi campaigned with limited success for the rights of women and to provide better amenities for the poor. She told Roy Moxham "I want to bring hospitals, schools, electricity and clean water to the poor in the villages. To stop child marriage and to improve life for women. The rest of that section is actually about her murder charges.
I remember not finding much in the sources about her political career but I'll have another look Mujinga (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could be helpful to link Caste politics for context (not a very good article, but maybe better someday!). Larataguera (talk) 17:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think roadsandkingdoms is correct there, for example Dakshayani Velayudhan was the first Scheduled Caste woman back in 1946

I'm checking for political stuff and it remains hard to find, eg here and here. Her obituaries don't say much and for example on googlenews, '"phoolan devi" "lok sabha"'searching between 1996 and 2001 gives zero hits. I've found some other bits and bobs, and am adding them as I go. And outlook has a bit I can put in now Mujinga (talk) 20:24, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for looking. Can't put it in if it's not there! Larataguera (talk) 02:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

b. (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:

seems to be
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
What do you think about adding an image of Durga? Larataguera (talk) 17:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
honestly i'm not sure Mujinga (talk) 19:54, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I ask, because providing images of Durga and Gandhi was a condition of Phoolan Devi's surrender. The article mentions that she bows before these images during the surrender (though it doesn't mention that this was a condition of surrender). Since the image is explicitly mentioned, it could make sense to have the image in the article. (Also an image of Gandhi, although I'm assuming that most readers will be more familiar with an image of Gandhi; but this could be an incorrect assumption, and maybe we should provide both images.) So the caption would be something like: "Phoolan Devi required images of Durga and Gandhi be present at her surrender." Larataguera (talk) 01:52, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

just as general feedback, I'm not really enjoying making replies within this template, the reply function sends me to the wrong place and I'm having to keyword search where to reply Mujinga (talk) 20:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This was my first full GA review, and I just used the default template. I think next time I would just set it up with regular subheadings. If you have any other feedback on this whole process, please let me know!
I think we're pretty close to being done. I guess we need to resolve these questions about naming conventions...Larataguera (talk) 02:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya thanks for your patience, I should have normal internet access again by tomorrow or maybe even later today. In terms of review feedback, I think things are going well - you are going beyond GA requirements on prose and that's fine for me because I want to take it to FA and we both want to improve the article. Do you have any questions for WikiProject India? Cheers Mujinga (talk) 09:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just the above questions. Hopefully they'll have some insight. Thanks Larataguera (talk) 01:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, the only thing left that would hold up the review is clarity on the naming convention. Larataguera (talk) 01:56, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hiya just checking in, no response yet to my query posted at Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics#Phoolan_Devi. Mujinga (talk) 17:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly no answer so ... I think I'll ask at Women in Red, I'd hope to at least get an answer there. Mujinga (talk) 13:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question asked here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Indian_naming_conventions - in the meantime is there anything else that needs doing? Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 13:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would be willing to pass this review if the naming convention were sorted out. If there are no responses, I suggest replacing all instances of "Devi" with "Phoolan Devi", because that seems to be the convention in most of the sources (unless you disagree that this is the most common usage). Larataguera (talk) 00:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no sure if most sources use "Phoolan Devi" but I do agree that's the least bad solution if we don't find any other guidance. So I was thinking to leave the question open for another day then make that change, hope that works for you. Cheers, Mujinga (talk) 10:05, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm still no answer on either thread, I suppose this is another way in which Wikipedia's systemic bias plays out. I tried to make the Devi ⇒ Phoolan Devi switch but it just makes reading the text rather awkward in my opinion, I'm so conditioned to using only the last name after first mention. I do note that her mother is/was Moola Devi, so maybe then Devi can be taken as a female last name? I had another look for guidance but didn't find much in Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(people) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indic) (or indeed Indian name) Mujinga (talk) 09:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I suppose this is one more facet of systemic bias. My concern is that if Mala Sen used "Phoolan Devi" throughout her full-length book, in spite of it's awkwardness, then there's probably a reason to do it that way. (And I didn't find it so awkward while reading that book). I could possibly be swayed if you showed me more sources that use just "Devi". For instance, I would likely reconsider if Roy Moxham's book used that convention. If Moxham uses "Phoolan Devi" throughout, then I would have to insist we do the same.
There was a little information at Indian name, where it says about Northern India "Many women, especially in rural areas, take on the surname Devi (meaning Goddess) or Kumari (princess) when they are married (ex. Phoolan Devi)". I wonder if using only Devi is too ambiguous, like writing an article about an English woman and calling her "Mrs." throughout? Or an inappropriate conflation with the word for goddess: Devi? I don't know. This isn't a subject I have much knowledge or experience with, and I am speculating based on my observation that the full name is used in the sources. Lacking further guidance, we should mimic the sources. Larataguera (talk) 11:18, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I agree we should follow the sources unless we find better advice. I'll have to go through the sources again then, prob can do that later today. Moxham uses "Phoolan" but that doesn't surprise me because if you were writing a chatty journalistic book about someone in english, you would refer to them by their first name. It is a good point that Mala Sen mostly uses "Phoolan Devi" but she does also use "Phoolan" eg p7,p29,p30,p39,p41,p46,p47 and "Devi" on occasion as well. Mujinga (talk) 12:17, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
PS Also thanks for pointing out that Phoolan Devi is actually used as an example at Indian name, not sure how I missed that! Mujinga (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A survey of sources:
Mala Sen - Mostly Phoolan Devi
Moxham - Mostly Phoolan
Dhondy - Phoolan Devi
Butalia - Phoolan Devi
Ashraf - Mostly Phoolan Devi
The Hindu -Phoolan Devi
Economic times - Phoolan Devi
Sony Jalarajan Raj, Rohini Sreekumar and Nithin Kalorth -Phoolan Devi
Shanthie Mariet D'Souza & Bibhu Prasad Routray - Mostly Phoolan Devi
Bonnie Zare - Mostly Phoolan Devi
Srilata Ravi and راڤي سريلاتا - Mostly Phoolan Devi
Szurlej - Phoolan Devi
So I've implemented the change to make it mostly "Phoolan Devi", except when the second mention is close and it's 100% clear we mean Phoolan Devi, then I put "Devi". This follows the sources in that most use "Phoolan Devi", and "Devi" is used in this way quite often. And for example the Hindustan Times in two examples uses "Phoolan Devi" and in another mostly "Phoolan Devi"! Devi does appear to be the surname and I hope to find a definitive answer in the future - in Indian name the source only says Devi is a surname and doesn't actually mention Phoolan Devi. Mujinga (talk) 18:32, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I've passed the article. Thanks! Larataguera (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.