- 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 Amkgp (talk) 05:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Kolkata Metro
... that Kolkata Metro is the first proposed and operational rapid transit system in India?Source: The Telegraph and Metro Railway, Kolkata
Improved to Good Article status by ArnabSaha (talk). Self-nominated at 19:16, 30 July 2020 (UTC).
Given this is a recent GA, everything is fine except I am having trouble finding a reference that clearly supports the claim (present only in lead and unreferenced) that it was the first proposed system of this type in India? No qualms about it being the first operational, but can we get a quote for the 'first proposed'? If not I suggest this claim is removed from hook and the lead. The QPQ check tool is broken (or simply fails to confirm the nom has never submitted a DYK before), so I am assuming QPQ is not needed (But it is always welcome!). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- Piotrus, Hi. it was proposed by the British in 1919-20. see the "early attempts" section. also, this is my 3rd dyk, so didnt do qpq. ❯❯❯ S A H A 09:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- ArnabSaha But does the source clearly say it was the first proposed, or that no other propositions of its type were made before? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:11, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
- Piotrus, till date no other document has been found. no sources mention any other cities. also, Kolkata was the capital of India till 1911, the British used to build things in Kolkata (example-Tram). the imes of India and theprint sources might help. it says
1) "As per records, for the British, ... They were keen that people avoid the additional expenses of of living in the city and migrate to places like ‘Dum Dum an Baraset"
2) "The underwater tube rail in Kolkata was planned by the British government when they were building a tunnel under the Thames river in London"
3) "the East-West Metro project across the Hooghly was conceptualised by the British in 1921, at the same time as the river Thames was being tunnelled in London" ❯❯❯ S A H A 06:33, 8 August 2020 (UTC)- ArnabSaha Hmmm. I'll ping another experienced DYK reviewer User:Yoninah for the second opinion whether the word proposed is ok. I am still concerned that if no source says so outright it borders on WP:OR. Lack of source to the contrary is not necessarily a confirmation of the fact. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Piotrus, OK. also, I checked multiple Indian cities article, no one mentions before Kolkata. ❯❯❯ S A H A 04:45, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- For what it is worth, I think you are right, but that doesn't mean we can say so per WP:OR. Which is why I asked for another opinion on this. WP:NOTTRUTH etc. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- I have 1 more thing to add. Even if the British proposal source is controversial, the 1950 Indian proposal can be considered. As per the official website, "It was Dr. B.C. Roy, the then Chief Minister of West Bengal, who for the first time conceived the idea in 1949 of building an Underground Railway" and "With a view to finding out an alternative solution to alleviate the suffering of the Kolkatans, the Metropolitan Transport Project (Rlys) was set up in 1969." ❯❯❯ S A H A 07:54, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- For what it is worth, I think you are right, but that doesn't mean we can say so per WP:OR. Which is why I asked for another opinion on this. WP:NOTTRUTH etc. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Piotrus, OK. also, I checked multiple Indian cities article, no one mentions before Kolkata. ❯❯❯ S A H A 04:45, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- ArnabSaha Hmmm. I'll ping another experienced DYK reviewer User:Yoninah for the second opinion whether the word proposed is ok. I am still concerned that if no source says so outright it borders on WP:OR. Lack of source to the contrary is not necessarily a confirmation of the fact. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Piotrus, Hi. it was proposed by the British in 1919-20. see the "early attempts" section. also, this is my 3rd dyk, so didnt do qpq. ❯❯❯ S A H A 09:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
@Piotrus and Yoninah: sir/ma'am, the DYK is stuck. ❯❯❯ S A H A 09:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- It may be tempting to submit yet another first hook, but you have plenty more in this GA article to write a better hook. This popped out at me:
- ALT1:
... that as India's first metro, the Kolkata Metro was constructed through trial-and-error over a period of 23 years?Yoninah (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, this one is also good. the first underwater metro thing can also be added. ❯❯❯ S A H A 19:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. Isn't the underwater part still under construction? I thought the two elevated lines are where they've gotten to after 23 years. Pinging @Piotrus: to review ALT1. Yoninah (talk) 19:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, partially correct. the 1st line is constructed was underground, with 1 station elevated and 1 at-grade. yes, underwater is still under construction.
- Yoninah, this one is also good. the first underwater metro thing can also be added. ❯❯❯ S A H A 19:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Yoninah and ArnabSaha:. The span of construction, which as you may note can be still ongoing, is IMHO not as interesting as pointing out the uncontroversial time range I propise in the following ALT2 below. What do you think? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:33, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- ALT2: ...that India's first metro, the Kolkata Metro, was first proposed in 1919 but became operational only in 1984?
- Is "ONLY" required here? doesn't seem appropriate. ❯❯❯ S A H A 06:25, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- "Only" is fine. It turns it into a hook, as opposed to a statement of fact. Yoninah (talk) 11:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- ok then, keep this. ❯❯❯ S A H A 15:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Here is a full review: GA received within 7 days of nomination. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. Images are freely licensed. I have tagged one sentence as needing an inline citation, as it verifies one of the ALT2 hook facts. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 17:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, the whole paragraph is a mix of the citations mentioned at the end. ❯❯❯ S A H A 17:59, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- @ArnabSaha: yes, I see that. But we have this DYK rule: WP:DYK#Cited hook, which calls for an inline citation right after the sentence containing the hook fact. Yoninah (talk) 18:00, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah, the whole paragraph is a mix of the citations mentioned at the end. ❯❯❯ S A H A 17:59, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- ok then, keep this. ❯❯❯ S A H A 15:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- "Only" is fine. It turns it into a hook, as opposed to a statement of fact. Yoninah (talk) 11:05, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
- Is "ONLY" required here? doesn't seem appropriate. ❯❯❯ S A H A 06:25, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
