Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Padma Bhushan award recipients (1954–1959)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by SchroCat 13:46, 27 November 2015 [1].

List of Padma Bhushan award recipients (1954–1959)

[edit]

List of Padma Bhushan award recipients (1954–1959) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): - Vivvt (Talk) 18:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

being one of India's most coveted civilian awards, I think the list should be presented in the proper format and with the encyclopaedic content. I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it satisfies FL criteria. Looking forward to constructive criticism. With the success or failure of this nomination, I would decide to work on the similar lists for Indian civilian awards in the near future. - Vivvt (Talk) 18:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Frankie talk
  • Given that it is English Wikipedia, I don't think it's necessary to write the Hindi text?
  • "The "Padma Bhushan" award recipients are announced" – why is Padma Bhushan in quote?
    • Done
  • "registered in The Gazette of India, a publication released by the Department of Publication" – I would rather suggest to use em-dash (—) instead of the comma as the subsequent one confuses a little bit.
    • Done
  • "When instituted in 1954, the award was classified as" – could we write the award's name in the first sentence of the para instead of "the award"?
    • Done
  • "However a year later on 15 January 1955, the Padma Vibhushan" – "however" indicates the continuation of a previous sentence but this is the start of a new paragraph.
    • Done
  • The states in the tables are pretty well-known geographies so I think linking them would border WP:OVERLINKING.
    • Because all the column entries should be linked for a sortable table.
They do not necessarily have to be linked unless it gives some kind of benefit to the readers. Anyway, WP:OVERLINKING quotes "The names of major geographic features and locations, languages, and religions [generally should not be linked]". -- Frankie talk 18:33, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked for the clarification here. - Vivvt (Talk) 08:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have made the changes per clarification provided by SchroCat and Maile66. - Vivvt (Talk) 07:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would wiki-link the first instances of references' publishers.
    • Thats not necessary per Crisco here.
The "not necessary per Crisco" implies that "Crisco" is a strict Wikipedia policy. Never mind.
Resolved comments from Pavanjandhyala (talk) 16:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Pavanjandhyala
  • Well, instead of Hindi text, you can provide a translation of the word Padma Bhushan if any.
    • That would be tough.
I said if any. Not mandatory. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mention when The Gazette of India is released i.e. weekly, monthly, quarterly etc.
    • Done
  • Wikilink Ministry of Urban Development.
    • Done
  • "The recommendations are received from all state and union..." — from all the. Not just for that. Ministries, Institutes of Excellence, Ministers, Chief Ministers and Governors of State, Members of Parliament all require "the" before them.
    • Done
  • However a year later on 15 January 1955 → Since 15 January 1955.
    • Done
  • "sixteen in 1957 and 1958". Do you mean "an aggregate of sixteen in 1957 and 1958"?
    • Done
You're yet to clarify this. Was it an aggregate value or sixteen each? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Pavanjandhyala: Modified it to "sixteen in 1957 and 1958 respectively". Hope that clarifies. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:36, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you did not get me. I assume that sixteen awards were presented in 1957 and another sixteen awards were presented in 1958. If that is the fact, please mention it clearly. Respectively is giving out some other meaning such as 16, 20, 14 for A, B, and C "respectively". Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:14, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hope I have clarified now. - Vivvt (Talk) 15:58, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • These awards were instituted in 1954. Then why "From 1954 till 1959, individuals...."? Why not "Till 1959, ..."? Any explanation?
    • Done
@FrB.TG and Pavanjandhyala: I have addressed some of your concerns. Please let me know if anything else needs to be fixed. - Vivvt (Talk) 10:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment – Isn't there a consensus for WP:IND articles not to have indic scripts in the lead? —Vensatry (ping) 15:35, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 02:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments – The first issue I found is the most serious, but there are a few writing issues as well.
  • The most important question I have is this: what is meant to source the winners? If it's the external link at the end, that really shouldn't be classified as an external link. I'd recommend placing a cite to that page in the Recipient column of each table, which will provide proper verification for the table.
    • Done
  • As a general comment, I count 28 red links among the 94 recipients. The FL criteria call for a "minimal proportion" of red-linked items, and this is a touch borderline to me. I wouldn't oppose over this issue, but I wouldn't want to see too many more red-linked people either. Our lists are meant to aid in navigation, after all, in addition to being interesting to read on their own terms. And any articles that can be created from this work are of great benefit to the encyclopedia. This is just something to keep in mind for your future plans to work on award lists like this one, which I hope you will do.
    • Since I started working these lists, I realized that @Tachs: is doing this wonderful job of converting these red links into the respective articles.
  • Twice in the lead, I see "circular–shaped", which should have a regular old hyphen instead of a dash.
    • Done
  • "The conferral of the award is not considered official without its publication in the Gazette. Shouldn't Gazette be in italics, since it is a print publication?
    • Done
  • Same goes for the next sentence.
    • Done
  • "and are required to surrender their medals with their names are struck from the register." "with" → "when".
    • Done
  • "The original specifications of the award was a circle...". "specifications" should be singular, I believe.
    • Done
  • A comma would be helpful after "the highest of the three" by the beginning of the third paragraph.
    • Done
  • The last word of "four sports-person" should be made plural.
    • Done
  • Reference 9 is to an article from a fellow encyclopedia, which isn't the strongest possible source. Can something better be found to verify Chand's goal-scoring total, which is really the only fact that source needs to verify? Giants2008 (Talk) 21:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done Added two sources including one from BBC.
I have addressed the concerns above. Please let me know if anything else is pending or needs to be corrected. - Vivvt (Talk) 08:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – After going through all of your responses, it looks like you got everything I listed. Nice work on the list, which is unique when compared to much of the fare we normally see at FLC. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Godot13

  • A few of the later images are missing Alt text.--Godot13 (talk) 04:29, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • And here I thought I was just making a drive-by comment... On reading the list it is a very nice summary and I have certainly learned something new.
  • You write Recipients whose awards have been revoked or restored, both of which require the authority of the President, are also registered in the Gazette and are required to surrender their medals when their names are struck from the register.
    • Could you explain the possible circumstances where this might occur?
      • The official statues does not mention the clauses under which this could be done. It did not happen with any of the civilian awards so far; except for the Bharat Ratna, the highest Indian civilian award, where the award was announced but not conferred so technically was not revoked.
    • Did this happen to any of the recipients in the 1955–59 list?
      • Done
  • As opposed to having five separate lists by year, would you consider merging them into a single list with a column on the left for year which would cover each of the rows for that given year?--Godot13 (talk) 06:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Godot13: Let me know if you expect any further changes. - Vivvt (Talk) 03:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been traveling. Let me give it another thorough read-through tomorrow night.--Godot13 (talk) 03:58, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Padma_Bhushan_award_recipients_(1954–1959)/archive1&oldid=1138483915"