Template:Did you know nominations/Wanita dan Satria

Wanita dan Satria

 * ... that the likely-lost film Wanita dan Satria (The Woman and the Hero; pictured) was said to "give a clear picture of the precarious position of Indonesian women"?
 * Reviewed: Battle of Warsaw (1831)

Created by Crisco 1492 (talk). Self nominated at 12:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svgh, date and hook references are all in order. No copy vio. good to go, except that I would suggest that the first para in the plot section have a reference, if this is to be a DYK.--Epeefleche (talk) 18:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Under WP:DYKSG #D2, it does not (even FAs like Terang Boelan use a note like used here) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It should have a ref under wp:v. We shouldn't have editors simply writing unsourced plot summaries.  That's OR.  The general rule in D2 is that "the article in general should use inline, cited sources." The paragraph is wholly unsourced.  The intro is not subject to the general wp requirement, because it summarizes other cited content.  To allow plot summaries, which do not summarize other cited content, to simply be made up by editors (and it won't always be a sysop making it up) is not a good practice, and is not in accord with wp:v (especially where it has been challenged).  Otherwise, open up the floodgates to 12 year olds putting in uncited plot summaries.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It should have a ref under wp:v. We shouldn't have editors simply writing unsourced plot summaries.  That's OR.  The general rule in D2 is that "the article in general should use inline, cited sources." The paragraph is wholly unsourced.  The intro is not subject to the general wp requirement, because it summarizes other cited content.  To allow plot summaries, which do not summarize other cited content, to simply be made up by editors (and it won't always be a sysop making it up) is not a good practice, and is not in accord with wp:v (especially where it has been challenged).  Otherwise, open up the floodgates to 12 year olds putting in uncited plot summaries.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Plot summaries may refer to the primary source itself, see WP:PLOTSUM. You may also want to take reference to all the articles listed in WP:FA to have a sense for the standard practice. It's completely within the style guideline. If you have a proposal, please propose it at WP:VPP. Alex ShihTalk 01:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've no problem with a plot para being sourced to a primary source, as that essay thinks is a good idea. My problem is that the first paragraph is (see my note above) "wholly unsourced".  My proposal is that the material be sourced -- per the wp policy wp:v, as challenged unsourced material is required to be.  I passed this on good faith, presuming that it would not be a problem for the editor -- and I thought it would be the quicker way for it to be approved, with the editor addressing my concern along the way (if I'm wrong and have to make the approval conditional, just let me know, but that seemed silly as I assumed the editor had a source, and would not object to supplying it).--Epeefleche (talk) 03:48, 21 August 2013 (UTC)