Talk:Kausheya

Did you know nomination

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 SL93 (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that kausheya was an ancient indian silk which is mentioned in the epics such as Ramayana and Mahabharata? Source: https://archive.org/details/silkbrocades00agra
  • ALT1: ... that the Hindu goddess Sita is referred to as "Kausheya vasini," which translates as "one who wears silk garments"? Source: https://archive.org/details/silkbrocades00agra
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of San Cesario

Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 03:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: This article was new enough when nominated, is long enough (>2500 chars), and has a suitable QPQ review. I couldn't see any sign of plagiarism from online sources, and the presentation of the content is suitably neutral. Some assertions are left without supporting citations, including most of the first paragraph and all of the second paragraph of the lead section. One of the citations is to "Not Available", which is presumably some sort of mis-input. Both proposed hooks are supported by citations in the article and are interesting enough. I prefer ALT0, but ALT1 is also approved. It's not clear to me that "Kausheya" should be capitalized, since it's apparently just the common noun "silk fabric", but maybe there's some rule regarding transliteration from Sanskrit I'm not aware of? The prose is also quite difficult to read, with spotty grammar, Sanskrit terms thrown in as though English speakers should know them and never defined, inconsistent transliteration (sometimes "kosh" but sometimes "kos"), and odd phrasing; I don't suppose it's quite bad enough to prevent this from passing, but it would really be good to see some cleanup before it tries to go to the Main Page. Bryan Rutherford (talk) 17:34, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

• Hello Bryan Rutherford, I have added the required citations. Kindly check. Thanks RV (talk) 05:27, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Alright, and I went ahead and fixed the citation to "Not Available", as well as cleaning up some punctuation, capitalization and italics issues. It meets the DYK standard now, though it would really benefit from some work on the prose. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 16:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)