Template:Did you know nominations/Raghunath Temple


 * 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 Victuallers (talk) 21:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Raghunath Temple

 * ... that the Raghunath Temple (pictured), in Jammu, was attacked twice in 2002 by suicide bombers causing death of security forces and devotees offering worship, as well as many injuries?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mesrop of Khizan

5x expanded by Nvvchar (talk). Self nominated at 03:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC).
 * Comment: Subsequent to posting on DYK it has been promoted to GA.
 * Symbol confirmed.svg This is a fivefold expansion and also qualifies for DYK as a newly promoted GA. It is long enough and new enough and the image is in the public domain. I added an extra inline citation for one of the hook facts. The article is neutral and I detected no policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:36, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * . Thanks for the review.-- Nvvchar . 10:59, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg Claim that the attacks were by "suicide bombers" unsupported by any of the cited sources. The only source for the first attack calls the attackers "militants" and says that "hurled grenades and sprayed bullets on security personnel and bystanders".  The terms used for the attackers and descriptions of their actions is inconsistent with a claim of a suicide attack.  Sources for the second attack show the same problem with the attackers being described as terrorists and militants.  The closest thing to a source supporting the suicide bomber claim for teh second attack is this news article which refers to the event as a "fidayeen attacks on two temples" while calling the attackers themselves "militants".  Wikipedia's article on fedayeen also does not support an interpretation of suicide attacker, indicating "assassin" and "freedom fighter" as being equally valid English equivalents. --Allen3 talk 13:22, 6 May 2015 (UTC)


 * An additional reference was introduced in between the other references during the DYK approval stage to verify the hook. However, I had used the Fedayeen word as it was used in the Times of India reference, the best news paper reference in India. In the Tribune news paper reference, the Director-General of Police, Mr A.K. Suri, had said the militants belonged to a suicide squad of the Pakistan-based militant outfit Lashkar-e-Toiba. I had also verified the Wikipage on Fedayeen, under section "origin" which mentions "dāʼīyīn as the plural of fidāʼī, which means "sacrifice."It is widely understood in the Arab world to mean those willing to sacrifice themselves for God." I was not aware that English usage for "suicide attacker is not as "assassin" and "freedom fighter". I stand corrected. In view of your opinion I have now made changes in the text in the article by removing the objectionable words of Fedayeen and suicide bombers. I have modified the hook as

ALT1 ... that the Raghunath Temple (pictured), in Jammu, was attacked twice in 2002 by terrorists causing death of security forces and devotees offering worship, as well as many injuries? I hope you will now find it in order. Thanks.-- Nvvchar . 01:43, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg The article all checks out fine still, but the hook is a little clunky, how about shortening the tail down a bit to something like: ... that the Raghunath Temple (pictured), in Jammu, was attacked twice in 2002 by terrorists, causing multiple fatalities? Harrias talk 09:51, 24 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Shortened version of the hook is fine.-- Nvvchar . 11:01, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

ALT2 ... that the Raghunath Temple (pictured), in Jammu, was attacked twice in 2002 by terrorists, causing multiple fatalities?

In that case, I've listed it as ALT2, but we'll have to wait for a new reviewer, as I can't review my own hook. Sigh. Harrias talk 11:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg ALT2 is a great improvement. Hook refs verified and cited inline. ALT2 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 21:36, 26 May 2015 (UTC)