Template:Did you know nominations/Brattata, Jet Pilot, and Okay Hot-Shot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The following discussion 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 SL93 (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Brattata, Jet Pilot (Roy Lichtenstein), Okay Hot-Shot, Okay![edit]

Created/expanded by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self nominated at 04:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Why is the suggestion of a hook for an already-reviewed nomination considered to qualify as an entire QPQ review? Let's have a real, full review, please; there are plenty of nominations that need one. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
And, if I may point out, the trio of reviews (Asana et al.) are not yet complete: if a review doesn't have an icon that indicates whether the article or articles have been approved or need more work, it's not a finished QPQ review. An initial review should cover all the basics: age, size, hook length and sourcing, article sourcing, image (if any), close paraphrasing, NPOV, and so on, and include that icon. Tony, please let us know when those three are ready, and when the other fourth one you pick is also to that point. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
The first three are approved.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:42, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Here is my new fourth: Template:Did you know nominations/Art in Paris.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:26, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Tony, but it is not a full review covering all the basics—length, etc.—as mentioned above for initial reviews. Hook sourcing is only one piece, and easily fixable; everything that needs fixing (or not) should be mentioned in a QPQ review. Please let me know when you've finished that. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:49, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Reveiw completed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg QPQ requirement has been satisfied; restoring tick per Hawkeye7's review on 11 July 2013. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg There is some overlap between these articles, so both Brattata and Mr. Bellamy fall short of 1500 characters of original content. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Checklist:
Brattata: 1988 characters, new four days before Tony nominated.
Jet Pilot: 1715 characters, new four days before Tony nominated. First paragraph is clearly copied from somewhere, likely some of Tony's other work.
I don't understand this issue.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Odd, don't see it now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Okay Hot-Shot, Okay!: 3956 characters, new four days before Tony nominated. Sentence here supports most of the hook.
Mr. Bellamy: Nowhere in text does it say he's on land.
Symbol possible vote.svg There is still duplicated text. I note that both Jet Pilot and Brattata repeat the same paragraph (starting Lichtenstein was a trained United States Arm), which is 400 characters, knocking them both under the limit. Also, hook issues. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Duplicated text counts in one place. 400 should only be subtracted from one character count if it is in 2 places. 400 does not seem to knock Brattata under the limit, so subtract it from that one.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • That feels like playing fast and loose with the rules. How about, you know, paraphrasing one of the two? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:47, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • It is not playing fast and loose. It is original in one place and duplicate in another. Just assign it as original content to one place.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • (ec) And if I say it should be applied to the shortest (which it should. Since when is a "buy one item, get one item free" offer going to let you buy something for a dollar and get a ten dollar item for free)? You're arguing instead of taking the two to five minutes that paraphrasing a single paragraph would take. And you haven't even begun to address the more major issue of the hook not being fully supported. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Nowhere near the interest necessary for the main page. The other Tony would rightly comment on this at WT:DYK if this got to the preps. Can't you find a source which points to the officer actually being on land, instead of being on an aircraft carrier or something else? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:42, 20 July 2013 (UTC)