Talk:Manoj–Babli honour killing case

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleManoj–Babli honour killing case has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 20, 2011Good article nomineeListed

My Copyediting[edit]

Ekabhishek, forgive me if I removed content from this article without intending to. One small favor I have to ask of you is to place periods or commas before an in-line citation if one is present. Thank you, Codedon (talk) 03:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Codedon, there is absolutely no policy for that. Whether the punctuation goes before or after the citation should be consistent within the article, but otherwise an article should stick to whichever style was first used. – iridescent 18:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, Iridescent; I would hate to prove you wrong, but perhaps this or this will be good reading. I'm pretty sure that's the policy, but I could be wrong. Take a look at it, will you? Codedon (talk) 23:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Did you even bother to read what you're linking there? Specifically, "Some editors prefer the in-house style of journals such as Nature, which place references before punctuation. If an article has evolved using predominantly one style of ref tag placement, the whole article should conform to that style unless there is a consensus to change it."? – iridescent 2 23:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, you don't need to get riled up now. I was just pointing something out. Personally, punctuation placed after an in-line citation looks better.
By the way, why do you always show up wherever I post? Codedon (talk) 23:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because you put a {{talkback}} on my talkpage pointing me here, perhaps?. – iridescent 2 23:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I meant why you showed up initially, when I first posted here. You just appeared, and I did not put a talkback on your page. Codedon (talk) 22:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because you posted about this article – at very great length – on Malleus's talk. In my 140,000 Wikipedia edits I have a grand total of seven pages in common with you, three of which are your, my and Malleus's talk respectively, two of which were reverting your vandalism, and one of which is this page. Drop the conspiracy theory and move away from the dead horse. – iridescent 06:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Manoj-Babli honour killing case/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lord Roem (talk) 23:08, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I look forward to reviewing this article. Almost completing my personal goal of removing the backlog in Law GANs. :) -- Lord Roem (talk) 23:08, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section by section review[edit]

Images

  • I'm not an expert on images, but does this really qualify as a "unique historic image"?

Lead

  • The first sentence appears to me as a run-on sentence. Maybe something like "...was the honor killing of...in June 2007 and the successive court case which historically convicted a defendant for an honor killing (which is rare/never happens, etc.)"
    • Make it past tense as I note in my example above.
      •  Done 1
  • Remove "apparently"
    •  Done 2
  • Change "official blessing" to something like "government approval" or "with the absence of government oversight" (whichever works with the situation).
    •  Done 3
  • What is the Dharmasastra? I'm assuming a religious code? Maybe note that in parenthesis.
    • According to the Wikipedia article, Dharmaśāstra is "a genre of Sanskrit texts and refers to the śāstra, or Indic branch of learning, pertaining to Hindu dharma, religious and legal duty". Is is alright if I make a simpler description using the information in the Wikipedia article, or do I need to cite it to a reliable source?
    •  Done I've gone ahead and added a definition and a citation from The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. 4 Codedon (talk) 21:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's a 'khap'?
    • I'm using khap as an abbreviation of khap panchayat.  Done Clarified. 5. Codedon (talk) 21:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • Hmm. How is the discussion of their siblings relevant? Or are they and I have just yet to read on...
    • I thought it would provide some context. The mothers, Seema, and Narendar are definitely important since they are discussed later in the article. Perhaps I can remove the discussion of the remaining siblings? The more I ponder it, the more that information becomes tangential.
      • Keep the parents, remove the siblings. :P -- Lord Roem (talk) 22:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        •  Done Removed all the siblings, save for Suresh, who was one of the convicts. 6
  • I would include their religious upbringing, which seems relevant if the sources can provide such info
    •  Not done I'm sure it's Hinduism, but none of the sources explicitly say so, so I'm afraid I cannot add that into the article.

Development of relationship and marriage

  • Note on image: It is of Manoj and Babli. It only notes Manoj in the caption.
    •  Done 6
  • You have an in-line cite in an odd location. Its right after 'Chanderpati', maybe move it to the end of the quote.
    • I think that's the standard placement of the citation, as seen here.
  • The quote seems too long to include its entirety. I suggest shortening what's included there.
    • Compared to some FA quotations (1 and 2), this quote is of moderate length.
      • Its a sytlistic decision - so its ok if you want to keep it that way. Lord Roem (talk) 22:52, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm going to keep it that way. checkY
  • There is nothing here about the viewpoint of the marriage from Babli. Is there anything to include about how her family reacted as the relationship began?
    • I couldn't find anything that discussed her family's standpoint during the development of the relationship. After the marriage, however, I found that Ompati (Babli's mother) did not consider the marriage dishonorable, but the men in her family did. I've now inserted that information into the section. 7  Done
  • I am left wondering after this section why they did this despite the risk of religious condemndation. Is there any discussion of this in the sources?
    • It's simply a matter of love. This article states, "The son had confided in the mother and she knew about their affection for each other". This says "commitment to their love and rebellion against rigid societal norms".  Done 8
  • I am concerned that the source here is just one person's account of what happened. Is this in anyway confirmed by the subsequent court proceedings/trial transcripts?

Court appearance

  • Say what a 'khap panchayat' is. I'm guessing its a religious court??
    • This is mentioned in the lead. Do I need to rehash it in the body of the article?
      • I see that its a caste-based council? But I'm a bit confused what that means. Is it a religious entity or is the caste council more of a secular civil entity. If its religious, then you just have to add that word in the lead to clarify its purpose. Not a huge thing, just a clarity issue. -- Lord Roem (talk) 23:04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, it's religious. I guess that since I've been working on this for so long, I assume that others know as much as I about this topic.  Done 9
  • State the date when the court issued its order annuling the marriage.
    •  Not done I spent about an hour looking for that, but I can't find it.
  • What was the familys' response to Babli and Manoj going to the judge on June 15 to seek protection? Or were they not present?
  • Remove 'even' in "Babli even asked for acceptance..."
  • Is an FIR a legal complaint? What effect did it have on this case at this stage? Was Manoj considered a suspect or something?
    • Precisely: First Information Report. The sentence in the article states: On 20 June Chanderpati's complaint regarding the kidnapping was filed as an FIR at the Bhutana police station following media pressure on the police. Essentially, Babli's family was the suspect because they performed the kidnapping.

Kidnapping and murder

  • Comma after "4:30p.m."
  • Change "confirming the family's fears" to something more direct, if you understand what I mean.

Court judgement

  • Change "fighting on their behalf" to "arguing on their behalf"
  • Paragraph 3 - insert - "... the Kaithal District court..."
  • Citing the specific sections of law is not needed.
    • Since this is a law article, wouldn't this be one of the most important aspects of the article?
      • Like the way you do it is cite Section 302, section 455, etc. - it doesn't add anything on its face, it seems extraneous. This is something to put in a 'Note' on the bottom of the page. You already have the provisions of law as you already state the charges. -- Lord Roem (talk) 17:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        •  Done Fine with me. I've converted them into notes. 16
  • Citing the specific names of the police officers is also not needed.
    •  Done Agreed. I left Jayender Singh and Jagbir Singh since they are mentioned later in the paragraph. 17
  • Move the in-line cite after "Bahadur" to the end of the phrase.
    • Ditto for what I said above about placement of citations.

Aftermath:Historical significance

  • Change some of the verb tenses here to past tense

Aftermath:Chanderpati

  • Explain how this is relevant as an entire section?
    • I wanted to provide a picture of the family's life following the murder and trial.

Aftermath-Vani Gopal Sharma

  • Same as above.
    • This section shows the magnitude of Sharma's verdict. That she receives so many death threats that she has asked to transfer speaks volumes.

Aftermath-Khap protests

  • This section is fine. checkY

Aftermath-Developments in honour killing law

  • This section puts the GAN at risk as an event that has a definite end that has not ended yet. Any changes in legislation may come soon in the current Parliament session. This section should be summarized more briefly.
    •  Done I've removed a quote 18 and added a sentence 19

Appeal

  • "Admitted the appeal..." - what does that mean?
  • What is the prisoners' current status? Is this up to date?
    • Unfortunately, the media appears to have lost interest in this topic. I haven't heard anything new about the case, save for this article (December 28, 2010) about Manoj's sister and the threats she has received.

Concluding Thoughts

  • VERY interesting article and well written. Please make the suggested improvements listed above so I can consider promoting it to Good-Article status. Best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 03:21, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you for stepping up to the plate to clear the GAN backlog. I will address your concerns today and in the coming week. Codedon (talk) 19:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you are done or nearing finished? -- Lord Roem (talk) 02:37, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I expect I'll be done probably by tomorrow. Codedon (talk) 09:21, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm done! Codedon (talk) 23:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I will look over it one more time before making a decision. -- Lord Roem (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moving to promote. Cheers, Lord Roem (talk) 03:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which temple?[edit]

The article mentions that the marriage took place at a Durga temple. However some sources state that it took place at an Arya Samaj temple.[1][2] Malaiya (talk) 02:35, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Manoj–Babli honour killing case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Manoj–Babli honour killing case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Manoj–Babli honour killing case. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:49, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Manoj–Babli_honour_killing_case&oldid=1221642091"