Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
The site of All India Radio has the news, but it does not have a stable URL, or I cannot find it. I can see the news at http://newsonair.com/showNews.asp and putting Buldhana as a search string, but there is no URL. This source sites about the compensation and gives the number of casualties as 19. It says that the number can increase as there were about 60-70 people in the bus.
Yes! Thanks for getting it. By the way, the Khiroda linked is not the one related here. The concerned Khiroda does not seem to have a Wikipedia article. I've taken the coordinates from Google Earth from my first-hand knowledge. Shivashree (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
The direction of travel was from Paturda to Shegaon if you need it. Students from nearby villages go to the Shegaon, nearby town, for schooling (OR, from local knowledge). Shivashree (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2012 (UTC)Reply
Several passages are too close to the sources (too similar to the source passages, that is). Preferably, use different sentence structure and also avoid distinctive/unusual words and turns of phrase.
The start of the first sentence, "A state stransport bus plunged into the river Purna", is largely verbatim from DNA, only changing the order of the last two words. That's way too close.
The entire last paragraph, "The MSRTC has announced ...", is very close to the AIR source and needs to be rearranged.
The sources do not appear to support the claim that the bus had mostly school children.
This article is, in my judgement, really pushing minimal length for a standalone article. I realize there isn't much information in the sources that isn't in the article, but can we work in another sentence or two of content?
The AIR source has disappeared again; the URL is indeed unstable, as noted above. This sort of thing is a familiar problem when trying to cover a breaking story, as most mainstream media sites aren't as good as wikis are on preserving article history. If a non-English source is used, manual translation on the collaboration page will be most helpful.
There wasn't a well-defined lede, but that was fixable by simply inserting a paragraph break, which I could do as an independent reviewer. The first two sentences also didn't flow well, but simply changing the first word of the second sentence from "A" to "The" seems to have cleared it up, again within my purview as an independent reviewer.
If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.
Several passages are too close to the sources (too similar to the source passages, that is). Preferably, use different sentence structure and also avoid distinctive/unusual words and turns of phrase.
The start of the first sentence, "A state stransport bus plunged into the river Purna", is largely verbatim from DNA, only changing the order of the last two words. That's way too close.
The entire last paragraph, "The MSRTC has announced ...", is very close to the AIR source and needs to be rearranged.
The sources do not appear to support the claim that the bus had mostly school children.
This article is, in my judgement, really pushing minimal length for a standalone article. I realize there isn't much information in the sources that isn't in the article, but can we work in another sentence or two of content?
The AIR source has disappeared again; the URL is indeed unstable, as noted above. This sort of thing is a familiar problem when trying to cover a breaking story, as most mainstream media sites aren't as good as wikis are on preserving article history. If a non-English source is used, manual translation on the collaboration page will be most helpful.
There wasn't a well-defined lede, but that was fixable by simply inserting a paragraph break, which I could do as an independent reviewer. The first two sentences also didn't flow well, but simply changing the first word of the second sentence from "A" to "The" seems to have cleared it up, again within my purview as an independent reviewer.
If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The AIR news transcript in Marathi language is available here as a PDF file. I am translating it as follows (third para from bottom):
Nineteen people died and 15 critically injured when Shegaon-Paturda bus fell down from a bridge on Purna river near Khiroda in Sangrampur tehsil of Buldhana district. There are 10 women and 7 men among the dead. The bridge is very narrow and does not have protective railings. The bus driver lost the control as a tire burst and the bus fell down in the water 45 feet down after tumbling twice. Seventeen dead bodies are brought up from the river so far. The injured are admitted at a hospital in Akola. Two of the injured are reported to have died here. The relief work is still going on. Meanwhile, the MSRTC has announced aid of 100,000 to the kins of those dead.
This has been a very messy review. The AIR source does not have a stable URL; on first review I found one that was stable for a while, but by the end of that review it had already disappeared, and as of this review an entirely different article is at the same URL. I'm leaving the URL in the Sources section because it's a record of the title of the article and where it was at one point during review. It was certainly used during review: the figure 60–70, mentioned above on this page, was in that material (and is not part of the passage translated on this page from Marathi), which together with the figure 45 in the other source justifies the "about 50–70" in our article. I believe I've accounted for every detail in this, but, as I said — messy.
Some passages were very close to the provided manual translation.
Alas, even though Marathi is (I gather) a language with a pretty hefty number of speakers, it's not one supported by Google translate, so one doesn't even have the vague sanity check that is all one can generally get from Google translate even for the languages it "supports".
A translation is a derivative work, which means it doesn't escape from the original copyright but instead adds to the original copyright. So distance from translated source is needed as well. I tried to provide some of this, pushing my purview as independent reviewer.
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
This has been a very messy review. The AIR source does not have a stable URL; on first review I found one that was stable for a while, but by the end of that review it had already disappeared, and as of this review an entirely different article is at the same URL. I'm leaving the URL in the Sources section because it's a record of the title of the article and where it was at one point during review. It was certainly used during review: the figure 60–70, mentioned above on this page, was in that material (and is not part of the passage translated on this page from Marathi), which together with the figure 45 in the other source justifies the "about 50–70" in our article. I believe I've accounted for every detail in this, but, as I said — messy.
Some passages were very close to the provided manual translation.
Alas, even though Marathi is (I gather) a language with a pretty hefty number of speakers, it's not one supported by Google translate, so one doesn't even have the vague sanity check that is all one can generally get from Google translate even for the languages it "supports".
A translation is a derivative work, which means it doesn't escape from the original copyright but instead adds to the original copyright. So distance from translated source is needed as well. I tried to provide some of this, pushing my purview as independent reviewer.
The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
