Template:Did you know nominations/List of National Defence Academy alumni


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 04:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

List of National Defence Academy alumni

 * ... that all the current chiefs of staff (COAS, CNS, CAS) of the Indian Armed Forces are National Defence Academy alumni?


 * ALT1:... that the current chiefs of Indian Armed Forces (Army, Navy, Air Force) are National Defence Academy alumni?

Created/expanded by Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk). Self-nominated at 14:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol voting keep.svg New enough, long enough, hook is sourced. No close paraphrasing or neutrality detected. Good to go. KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:07, 3 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg There are several sentences in the lede that do not appear in the body (which is okay, given the format) and are also not sourced (which is not okay). Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, could you please address this? KAVEBEAR, perhaps you could take a look, too. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Could please be more specific, I mean what are the issues to be fixed? KC Velaga  ☚╣✉╠☛  00:46, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The following three sentences, as far as I can see, are unsourced: "The NDA is located at Khadakwasla near Pune, Maharashtra. It is the first tri-service academy in the world. NDA alumni have led and fought in every major conflict in which the Indian Armed Forces has been called to action since the academy was established." Furthermore, you should check to see that every sentence that is not dependent on a table has a source. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:18, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fixed it and please review it and mention any other issues that need attention. Thank you.  KC Velaga  ☚╣✉╠☛  13:08, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't have access to the book, but that seems okay, thank you. The full review has already been provided above, so I don't think I will do another one. Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:17, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you Please follow the link 1 and go to page 13.  KC Velaga  ☚╣✉╠☛  00:22, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: I have replaced the "fixed" template with a bolded "Fixed" above since the tick looks too much like an AGF approval tick, and nominators are not allowed to approve their own nominations. Vanamonde93, since you superseded the original review icon with your own, please be sure to place a new icon when the nomination is again ready to be approved. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:40, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for providing the source. This actually creates a problem, however, because the sentence in the article is not supported by the source; the source says "not only the first of its kind in Asia but perhaps the world." We cannot say "first in the world" on that basis alone; so I would suggest changing the article to say "first in Asia," or finding another source. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:03, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Fixed it. KC Velaga ☚╣✉╠☛  11:55, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Okay, this should be GTG. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your review, how can I be confirmed that this has accepted officially and will be published on a so and so date. KC Velaga  ☚╣✉╠☛  12:21, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * my placing the "confirmed" symbol on the review indicates that it is ready to be moved to the main page. This is as "official" as it gets, because this is an entirely volunteer run process. I cannot, unfortunately, give you a date; DYK queues are assembled by various editors, and they pick and choose based on what hooks catch their eye, what hooks best fit the queue they are preparing, and what hooks have been waiting longest. Therefore, this hook might be published in two days; or it might be published in a month. Most likely, it will take a couple of weeks. You can rest assured, though, that it will not be forgotten, and somebody will come around to it at some point. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:27, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. KC Velaga  ☚╣✉╠☛  12:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)