Template:Did you know nominations/1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes


 * 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 97198 (talk) 23:52, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes

 * ... that 16 people were killed during the 1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes?
 * ALT1:... that the 1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes are considered as the starting point of events leading to Operation Blue Star and insurgency in Punjab?

Created by Vigyani (talk). Self nominated at 02:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC).


 * ALT1 is no good since it provides no context for the reader not familiar with Indian history. They won't know what Operation Blue Star was. The first suggestion is better, but some more context would be better there as well. Also, simply saying that 16 died doesn't hook very much. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * For ALT1: Thats why it is wiki linked, so that those interested can read about Operation Blue Star. It will be difficult to provide much context in less than 200 characters. I have seen plenty of hooks like this in DYK. For main: I am trying to find some alternative wording. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 09:21, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I think Oiyarbepsy didn't mean to review this and was just giving his comments. So a review is needed here. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 15:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT2:... that Sant Nirankaris were expelled out of the Sikh community after the 1978 Sikh-Nirankari clashes in which 13 Sikhs and 3 Sant Nirankaris were killed?


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:08, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg, the article repeats the notion of the event being instrumental in the Punjap clashes, thats not substantiated elsewhere. Low quality. Better no go. Serten (talk) 16:04, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know very much about this, but the claim is supposedly substantiated by four sources. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:27, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * can you clarify?, as Panyd also notes, there are four sources backing up that statement. Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 01:54, 5 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I'll pick this up as it seems static. Refs 8 and 9 support the assertions made in ALT1. I think that hook should link to Punjab insurgency for clarity. I don't think the hook should be excluded on the basis that the topic is a complex, or not very well known one. The links to the articles should suffice. Article passes on size and date (although this has taken a while!). Difficult, complex topic is dealt with in a neutral manner in the article. Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go on ALT1. I've also checked refs for ALT2, which is probably a better hook on second look as it makes the context easier to understand, so feel free pick which one you prefer. SFB 13:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the review. This is indeed a complex topic. I had to do lot of reading to write this article. I have modified the ALT1 to link to Punjab insurgency. I will also prefer ALT2 as it contains cited facts, is clearer and more hooky. -- Vigyani talkਯੋਗਦਾਨ 14:12, 9 November 2014 (UTC)