Template:Did you know nominations/Stanley Lebergott

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 PumpkinSky talk 23:15, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Stanley Lebergott

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that American economist and professor Stanley Lebergott argued that consumerism has had a positive impact on the U.S. economy and standard of living?

Created/expanded by Futurist110 (talk). Self nom at 00:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

• There are several issues with this nomination. I believe that a DYK-ready submission will entail a complete rewrite. The most pressing things are:
  1. The article is slightly too short. 1,500 characters are the minimum.
  2. All references are bare references and need to be completed to indicate title, author, accessdate, publisher, and so on.
  3. All references are in the form of end notes. We need inline citations instead.

  Please contact me on my talk page should you need help with any of those issues. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 11:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

• I fixed all of what you mentioned except making the references complete. I need some help with that part. Thank you very much. Also, could you please take a look at my DYK nomination of List of United States Presidents by net worth if you have some time? The editor who was previously reviewing it hasn't responded to me posting on his talk page for a week or even more right now. Thank you. Futurist110 (talk) 22:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
  • The three issues above are now solved. I still haven't done the plagiarism check, and I think we need to present the article in something different than a one-block-of-text paragraph. Categorisation also still needs to be improved, give me a day or two. --Pgallert (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I fixed that one-block-of-text article issue. Futurist110 (talk) 03:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

- a few things that can be easily fixed.

• The section "Life" should be split up. I recommend sections such as "Early Life" and "Economic career." It also shouldn't be one paragraph long.
• The last section of "Life" needs references (after reference #4), as it's currently unreferenced.
• Article can use an infobox. I added an infobox, just verify that it's all correct, and also perhaps add what he was known for in the "known for" parameter of the template when you click "edit" on the article.

--Activism1234 01:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I fixed all of what you said I should fix. Futurist110 (talk) 03:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok looks much better. I split "Economic Career" further into several paragraphs. The ending of the first and second paragraph should both have references. Other than that, I'd say it's pretty good. I'll make some minor edits just for formatting as well. --Activism1234 03:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

(Sorry, I was without Internet access for the last 3 days) Ok, now it looks like a DYK submission ;) Article is long enough, new enough, free of plagiarism, and does not have other glaring issues. I'm not yet happy with the hook. The article says "between 1890 and the 1950s", that is not the same as in the hook. Moreover, the hook fact is referenced to the two papers that contradict each other, and that is not perfect (because of the dependence of the Lebergott ref, and a possible OR concern). So either we need a new hook, or the old one must be strengthened in wording and referencing. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 08:05, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that American economist and professor Stanley Lebergott argued that consumerism has had a positive impact on the U.S. economy and standard of living? Futurist110 (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2012 (UTC) This new hook would be better. Futurist110 (talk) 21:57, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I think if you change the current hook to that one, it'd be good. --Activism1234 03:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I want this new hook to be the hook that I use. Futurist110 (talk) 05:16, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

- All right, the article is good now and hook is fine. --Activism1234 05:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 06:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)