Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Jagjit Singh Lyallpuri

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion 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 PFHLai (talk) 15:56, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Jagjit Singh Lyallpuri[edit]

Created by Soman (talk). Self nominated at 00:14, 9 June 2013 (UTC).

  • New, long, neutral, good QPQ. Has phrasing issues: ref 1 doesn't seem to source the statement at all, and ref 2 says that he was the last founding party member alive, not last founding central committee party member alive. Resource the statements and give me a ping czar · · 01:47, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
  • I've added a new ref, that clarifies the situation. In one of the sources, there is a '(M)' misssing, which is clear from context. --Soman (talk) 00:14, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
One source was added, and it doesn't mention the Central Committee. (Options: Find a supporting source for the statement, or rephrase the hook.) Also the new hook is cited incorrectly (use {{cite web}} to make it easier), though it isn't a concern for the DYK. My prior points still need to be addressed—if the refs don't support the statement, remove them. You could make this very easy for me by picking a citation that sources the line nearly directly, and we can be on our merry way, but the way this lede item is sourced gives me pause as to the quality of the rest of the article's sourcing. czar · · 06:59, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
http://www.hindustantimes.com/Punjab/Ludhiana/Oldest-surviving-founder-member-of-CPM-passes-away-at-96/SP-Article1-1067512.aspx clearly says "Oldest surviving founder member of CPM passes away at 96" and "... Lyallpuri remained a member until CPI split into two in 1964 when he, along with veterans such as Jyori Basu and AK Gopalan, founded CPI (M).", http://www.tribuneindia.com/2012/20120411/ldh1.htm#16 says "He became a member of the 25 member central executive committee of the CPI in 1964...", http://www.cpiml.in/home/files/Red%20Star%20Weekly/Red_Star_Weekly_issue__22_vol_2_2nd_June_2013.pdf "He was one of the 32 National Committee members who walked out from CPI in 1964 and formed the CPI(M)."
The tribuneindia article clearly misses an '(M)' when it says 'central executive committee of the CPI in 1964'. This is clear from context (the CPI leadership is not CC but National Council). When Hindustan Times talks about him being the last surviving founder, they clearly refer to founder as someone having been part of the original CPI(M) CC. --Soman (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
I re-read all three sources and none say that he was a founding member of the committee. At best, I can blend sources to say that the party split in 1964 and he joined a Central Committee in 1964, but I'm left to imply the rest (see 3b). This would be easily rectified by modifying the article's statement and the hook to remove the Committee mention and the non-HT sources, as the HT source alone would be enough to source that he was the last surviving founding member of the CPIM case closed. czar · · 04:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
This isn't that complex: CPI(M) was founded in 1964-> if he was a member of the CC in 1964, then he was a member of the founding CC. --Soman (talk) 01:02, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I never said it was complex, only that the source didn't back up the statement. I don't know whether he was in the founding CC or if he joined the CC after it was founded, and I don't want to guess. If you would prefer, feel free to request a new reviewer. I think I've explained my position re: 3b as well as I could. czar · · 02:14, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
  • A new reviewer would say the same thing: the sources do not directly support the hook, and without that direct support, the CC cannot be used as it is. Logic is a feeble reed in this case, which is why WP:SYNTH is a rule. Unless new sources are found, czar's position looks to be the correct one. Soman, this won't qualify for DYK unless you're willing to make the requested changes. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
ALT2 (Copyedited a bit.) Checks out—good to go. Optionally you can add that the party asked him to begin this revolt, but it's good as is. czar · · 15:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)