- 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 Yoninah (talk) 21:09, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- ... that Narmakosh, compiled by Narmad, is the first monolingual dictionary of the Gujarati language? Amaresh Datta (1988). Encyclopaedia of Indian Literature: Devraj to Jyoti. New Delhi: Sahitya Akademi. p. 1021. ISBN 978-81-260-1194-0
Created by Gazal world (talk). Self-nominated at 14:49, 23 July 2018 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough
|
|
|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
Overall: 
Spot on. Well sourced. Everything else is fine. Hook is probably as interesting as it is going to get having looked at the sources. Dictionaries are not renown for their inherent interest. Good to go. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
"Monolingual" is unsourced. Gatoclass (talk) 16:55, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: Thanks for your comment. The source cited in hook says that the dictionary gives meaning of Gujarati words in Gujarati itself. That means it is monolingual dictionary. -Gazal world (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- Fine, but the hook fact is still uncited in the article. Gatoclass (talk) 17:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- It is cited in history section. See. --Gazal world (talk) 17:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- I'll take another look tomorrow - too tired right now. Gatoclass (talk) 17:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: Are you now refreshed? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- The hook fact is clearly stated and sourced; I made it even clearer. Restoring tick per Gog the Mild's review. Yoninah (talk) 21:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Spot on. Well sourced. Everything else is fine. Hook is probably as interesting as it is going to get having looked at the sources. Dictionaries are not renown for their inherent interest. Good to go. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
