Template:Did you know nominations/Dattatraya Parchure
- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:28, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Dattatraya Parchure
[edit]- ... that Dattatraya Parchure, also called the "second Savarkar", was initially convicted but later acquitted in the assassination case of Mahatma Gandhi?
- Reviewed: Sophie Taylor
- Comment: Would prefer it be displayed on 2nd October, Gandhi Jayanti
Moved to mainspace by Dharmadhyaksha (talk). Self nominated at 06:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC).
-
- Yeah sure. Have requested at GOCE to do it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- I hope you're not holding your breath. EEng (talk) 19:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- Haha! Nopes! I will simply edit my request to get this on main page on 2nd October 2015. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Even that might be optimistic. EEng (talk) 02:02, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- 2019 then? 150th anniversary celebrations!
Btw, User:Vanamonde93 is working on it now. So 2014 might be possible. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- 2019 then? 150th anniversary celebrations!
- Even that might be optimistic. EEng (talk) 02:02, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- Haha! Nopes! I will simply edit my request to get this on main page on 2nd October 2015. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- I hope you're not holding your breath. EEng (talk) 19:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah sure. Have requested at GOCE to do it. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Needs reviewer. Copyediting is done by GOCE. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 18:11, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- New and Long enough. QPQ done. Hook is properly formatted and interesting enough. The content taken from citation 2-6 adds up. But majority of the content is taken from source 1 ans scattered over several pages. I will slowly verify it in 2-3 days. @Dharmadhyaksha: Is it possible for you to split the citation 1 by page into several citations so that it is easy for verification.? Plus "initially convicted" part of the hook does not have inline citation. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 06:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Finally a reviewer! Thanks for taking it up. The ref 1 has a long interview of the author with subject's son and then the author himself keeps adding a lot of stuff in between. As a result the whole text is not chronological but goes in flashbacks and such. It would be difficult to separate all references. It would also add too many breaks in the ref. Sorry for making it difficult, but that's how it is. Have added inline citation to the "initially convicted" point. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:24, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- I am reading the book now and have finished the last section. First two section are remaining. I noticed that you have left one detail about Dr. Parchure's life post his release from jail and return to Gwalior. In the book, it is mentioned that he continued to use indirect means to promote Savarkarism although he was not to engage in politics directly. Also, it is not mentioned that who banned him from entering Gwalior. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 08:28, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- Book only says that he began studying Ayurvedic medicine not that he began practicing and also in Gwalior ( although perhaps it can be concluded). --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 09:03, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- It is not clear if Hindu Rashtra Dal was established in 1942.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 09:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- The last 2 sentence in Hindutva activism section could be merged in one as the only important thing is that he was called "second Savarkar". I don't see how the meeting itself is so important? or "the meeting" could be converted into "a meeting. Rest everything looks okay. No close paraphrasing. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 09:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
- Finally a reviewer! Thanks for taking it up. The ref 1 has a long interview of the author with subject's son and then the author himself keeps adding a lot of stuff in between. As a result the whole text is not chronological but goes in flashbacks and such. It would be difficult to separate all references. It would also add too many breaks in the ref. Sorry for making it difficult, but that's how it is. Have added inline citation to the "initially convicted" point. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:24, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- New and Long enough. QPQ done. Hook is properly formatted and interesting enough. The content taken from citation 2-6 adds up. But majority of the content is taken from source 1 ans scattered over several pages. I will slowly verify it in 2-3 days. @Dharmadhyaksha: Is it possible for you to split the citation 1 by page into several citations so that it is easy for verification.? Plus "initially convicted" part of the hook does not have inline citation. --Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 06:34, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- I don't know which "indirect means" you are referring to. He followed the naming strategy, named a few dozen children as Vinayak in honour of Savarkar. Is that what you are referring to? There is nothing "political" as such in it. Also the book doesn't say anywhere as to who banned him. (Or does it and I overlooked it?) Yeah, that conclusion is very much logical. Have added another source for 1942 establishment of HRD. One of the sources in the article itself has this info, but I couldn't locate it now, so added new one. Merged the last two sentences of activism section. Well, the Mahasabha's meet of these many members is quite important. Its just like the Congress used to have theirs. Mahasabha still has its meets even today. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- The article had following prose in it:
"Vinayak Chaturvedi, associate professor of History School of Humanities at the University of California, Irvine, was given his first name "Vinayak" by Parchure while Chaturvedi was Parchure's patient. Chaturvedi later on described this act as Parchure's way of honouring and promoting Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. Parchure's son Upendra, also a doctor himself, stated in an interview to Chaturvedi that many of Parchure's male child patients were named Vinayak on his suggestion."
But that was removed in copyedited as not directly relevant. Should I add it back? Very less info is available online on our subject. (I even looked for his photograph as the trial-era pics are in PD now. But he isn't visible in any of those pics as he was seated on the last and 3rd bench during the trial besides Savarkar.) So couldn't find who banned him. It might be the government but no guesses on which. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:23, 11 September 2014 (UTC)- I also tried to find but no information about banning. I will get back about the kids naming soon. Also due to some syntax problem I couldn't see your recent changes in the page. Only in the edit window, I could see your message. Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 06:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- No need to add it back, now I also think that it is irrelevant in the overall picture. My problem is that if it was only to honor Savarkar, then it was okay. But the author is trying to indicate it as a political strategy to promote Savarkarism. But let us leave it for some other day.
Good to go as everything is checked now.--Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 08:45, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- I also tried to find but no information about banning. I will get back about the kids naming soon. Also due to some syntax problem I couldn't see your recent changes in the page. Only in the edit window, I could see your message. Vigyanitalkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 06:50, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- The article had following prose in it:
