Template:Did you know nominations/Tomb of Imam Zamin

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk| 
 * 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) 05:39, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

{{DYK conditions}}

Tomb of Imam Zamin

 * ... that although the Tomb of Imam Zamin is located inside the Qutb Minar complex, it has got no connection with the other monuments of the complex?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Dadia Forest

Created by Royroydeb (talk). Self-nominated at 11:54, 26 April 2019 (UTC).


 * I've removed the particular phrase, used in the hook per WP:WEASEL. Need a new hook. &#x222F; WBG converse 09:46, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * ALT1:... that the Tomb of Imam Zamin is the last addition to the Qutb Minar complex? RRD (talk) 12:20, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ Hook looks good (I can't think of anything more interesting) though I am thinking of some way to punch the above fact with its being constructed after about a century of others. Article okay from all aspects. &#x222F; WBG converse 12:46, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed; too little detail from previous one and no DYK icon given. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The image is appropriately licensed, the ALT1 hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:47, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it is not the last addition to the complex. Other structures have been built, although they may not be part of the UNESCO site nomination.  Abductive  (reasoning) 04:43, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Pinging Cwmhiraeth and Royroydeb, since the previous post takes issue with the ALT1 hook facts. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * The information in the hook is correct as it is sourced from a book published by the archaeological survey of India. Probably have a confusion about Mehrauli Archaeological Park being a part of the Qutb complex which is not. RRD (talk) 09:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * A book on the archeology will of course omit things like Metcalfe's Folly which was built on the Qutb complex in the 1800s. But no, the hook is not correct. Abductive  (reasoning) 16:31, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Due to concerns about ALT1, it has been struck. I've taken another look at the article but it appears that there's nothing else that could be used as a hook (other than that it's part of a complex that's a World Heritage Site). I'll give this some thought over the next few days, but I may mark this for closure if nothing else can be done here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:14, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Unfortunately, there does not appear to be any information remaining in the article that could be used as a hook. Since the remaining options have been rejected for various reasons, the nomination is now marked for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg object to Narutolovehinata5's views on "interesting". They seem to have a limited view of Indian articles, as evidenced through their various comments on Indian DYKs. Nothing seems to satisfy their interesting-ness criteria. I will have a look into this article and propose some hook. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Please note that I have the same standards for other countries too. It doesn't matter if the hook subject is from India, Brazil, Japan, or Senegal, if the "interesting to a broad audience" criterion isn't met, then something else needs to be proposed if possible. Remember that Wikipedia is an international site, and as much as possible, hooks need to be something that can be understood even by people and cultures who are not familiar with the subject. And just because the article subject is Indian doesn't mean it can't be interesting, and in fact there have been plenty of good hooks or hook proposals that have come from that country: for example, Template:Did you know nominations/Manilal Dwivedi. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Was having an off-Wiki discussion with Izno about this nomination, and he suggested something quirky like: This plays to the fact that Zamin was born Muhammad Ali. I have some reservations about it since it might be misleading (since people would think it's referring to the boxer), but would be open to it if say it was for April Fool's Day. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:59, 25 July 2019 (UTC)'
 * ALT2 ... that Muhammad Ali is buried at the Tomb of Imam Zamin?
 * Completely object to ALT2. Firstly, the person is commonly known as Imam Zamin and not Muhammad Ali. Secondly, hook is not interesting as by the same yardstick, one can write "Humayun is buried at Humayun's tomb", "Akbar is buried at Akbar's tomb". RRD (talk) 14:33, 26 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg As there are no longer any suitable hook options and the last remaining option was rejected by the nominator, this is now marked for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg —   Whoaaa!  I have to agree with 'Dharmadhyaksha'. – More over, the whole idea of "interesting to a broad audience" has been belabored to the point of self defeat in this case. No one subject appeals to all people in the first place, and expecting that a hook should also appeal to multiple cultures on top of it all is rather ridiculous. I object to the idea of closing the nomination, until a suitable hook, that appeals to a reasonably broad audience, can be found. I saw no 'weasel' phraseology in the original hook, which, btw, is very interesting. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 23:09, 29 July 2019 (UTC)


 * More possible hooks: §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 09:02, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ALT3 ... that the Qutb Minar complex, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in Delhi, houses a tomb of one of the descendants of Muhammad?
 * ALT4 ... that Imam Zamin, one of the descendants of Muhammad, constructed his own tomb a year before his death?
 * The issue with the original hook was that the hook fact (that it has no relation to the rest of the complex) does not appear in the body; indeed, as pointed out in one of the comments above, even the fact of it being the last addition to the complex has been disputed. Of the two new hooks proposed, ALT3 sounds good to me. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:04, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Please wait; I will leave a comment. &#x222F; WBG converse 13:06, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In the meantime, I've made copyedits to both ALT3 and ALT4; while ALT4 is an okay hook, it was very commonplace in the past for tombs to be completed even before the deaths of their intended occupants (the most famous examples being the pyramids of Egypt), so ALT3 probably remains the best option. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good. ALT4 seems the most interesting, even intriguing. i.e. Imam Zamin making his own tomb a year before his death. Did he know he was going to die? In any case ALT4 really invites one to make further inquiry. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:32, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned earlier in the discussion, it was not uncommon for tombs to be constructed before the death of the intended occupant and in fact was fairly common in some cultures, such as Ancient Egypt. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:20, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Naruto is adamant and expert in stalling many Indian DYKs. So can you simply approve ALT3? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg I see no problems with ALT3 or ALT4. All hook criteria check, and the sources check. Unless there are concrete criteria issues to be addressed (I see none), and there is something more than just an opinion about the hook 'not' being interesting, the article is good to go. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 08:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

|}}