Template:Did you know nominations/Mah Laqa Bai

Mah Laqa Bai

 * ... that the two centuries-old tomb of Mah Laqa Bai (pictured), a Nizam era Urdu poetess and courtesan, was renovated in 2011 using funds from the Consulate General of the United States in Hyderabad?
 * Reviewed: Jacob, the Liar

Created/expanded by Mspraveen (talk). Self nom at 04:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg 1. The article's prose portion has been expanded from 462 characters to 3,008 (not including a long quote; with it, it would become over 3,500) on 19 September, therefore eligible.
 * 2. Article is therefore sufficiently long.
 * 3. Cites sources with inline citations and all images are from commons. A bit flattering toward the subject, but that is based on the references cited and far from a breach of neutrality.
 * 4. Hook is well cited and conforms to format guidelines.
 * 5. Editor who expanded the article has reviewed other DYK's.
 * (I am a new reviewer, so all editors may add a second opinion. However, article seems fine to me). Bahavd Gita (talk) 05:51, 22 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Review looks basically okay as far as it went, though the "funds" portion of the hook was not cited immediate after the relevant sentence in the article as it should have been; I fixed this issue by adding the needed citation. Unfortunately, there don't appear to have been checks for copyvio or close paraphrasing. There are some issues in this regard. Compare, for instance, "clearing the area of debris and restored the buildings and their exquisite decorations" in the article with "cleared the area of debris and is restoring the buildings and their exquisite decorations" in this source, and "the first woman poet of India to author a full collection of Urdu ghazals and whose anthology was ever published" in the article with "the first woman to author a full collection of Urdu ghazals" in the same source (though it isn't the one cited, it's needed to support the Urdu ghazals, even as the source cited covers the later publication info). Other sources should be checked for similar close paraphrasing. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Dear BlueMoonset, thank you for taking a look at the nomination and the article with great depth. I have tried to address the copyvio concerns in the article. It was definitely not my intention, but it seemed to have just happened for a few phrases here and there. Hopefully the article will appear fine in its current form now. Please raise any other concerns that one may have. Mspraveen (talk) 16:06, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Mspraveen, BlueMoonset has asked me to have a look at this. Unfortunately I'm still seeing some closeness between the article and its source: for example, we have "Her adopted father saw to her education personally and that allowed her to have the best teachers available" vs "Her adopted father...saw to her education personally and she had the best teachers available". Some other phrases from that source also need rewording. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:23, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello Nikkimaria, thank you very much for taking time in checking the article for paraphrasing. As far as I know, I have removed any more hints of closeness from the above-referenced source. If you can help in identifying any more instances, then I'll appreciate that. Thank you once again! I wish you a nice weekend. Mspraveen (talk) 09:36, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Mspraveen. I've checked the other sources and they're now fine, it's just footnote 2 that's still at issue here. Could you do a bit more rewriting of that material? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:08, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Nikkimaria, thank you for the reply. It may sound annoying, but I'm unable to identify sentences that seem to be problematic. Do you use a script or tool to check such things? If so, please let me know of it. I'll install it and check the areas myself. If you don't use a script, I request you to identify the sentences that seem to be a problem. I'll appreciate your guidance. Mspraveen (talk) 10:22, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Nope, no scripts - there are some that exist, but they generally don't work on books, and in any case I prefer checking by hand. Here's what I still see as an issue: "she was not only awarded with jagirs and estates on various occasions" vs "she was awarded several honours with jagirs or estates on various occasions"; "She the only woman of her period to be given recognition publicly. Not only she was made a senior member of the omrah — the highest nobility, but also she was frequently consulted by the rulers of the state" vs "Chanda was the only woman of the period to be given recognition and made a senior member of the omrah, the highest nobility, and she was frequently consulted by the ruler on matters of state"; "Mah Laqa was a devout Muslim, she was influenced and exposed to understanding of Hindu epics and philosophy" vs "Chanda was a devout Muslim, but was influenced and exposed to an understanding of the great Hindu epics and philosophy". Nikkimaria (talk) 12:35, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, Nikkimaria! I appreciate you picking out the sentences for me. I have rewritten them to the best of my abilities. Can you check once again (hopefully a last time for both of us :))? Mspraveen (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Yep, looks like it's now good to go. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:30, 3 October 2012 (UTC)