Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/The Word for World Is Forest

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Jonesey95 (talk | contribs) at 08:41, 29 January 2019 (Fix Linter errors using AutoEd). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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) 22:36, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

The Word for World Is Forest

[edit]

Improved to Good Article status by Vanamonde93 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:34, 27 August 2016 (UTC).

  • No issues found with article, ready for human review.
    • This article was Listed as a Good Article on 09:29, 24 August 2016
    • This article meets the DYK criteria at 31568 characters
    • All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
    • This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
    • ? A copyright violation is suspected by an automated tool, with 33.3% confidence. (confirm)
      • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
  • No overall issues detected

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This is not a substitute for a human review. Please report any issues with the bot. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 18:01, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

  • As the human reviewer for this article, I found this newly promoted GA article (24 August 2016) is well-written and above the minimum 1500-character limit that is required. There is no clear case of copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. The hook itself is straightforward, compact, and supported by its offline sources. The nominator has also done his/her portion of QPQ. SyFuelIgniteBurned 19:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Article: Several reviewers have noted that the film Avatar (2009) shares key narrative features with The Word for World is Forest.[64][65] Specific thematic points of resemblance include a depleted earth, exploitive resource extraction on another planet, natives of that planet living in harmony with a sacred natural world, and a successful revolt by those natives against the exploiting humans.
  • Source: Avatar shares key narrative features with Ursula Le Guin’s 1972 novel The Word for World is Forest, including a depleted earth, exploitive resource extraction on another planet, and a successful revolt by the natives. Natives live in harmony with a natural world that is considered sacred.

- That's a little too similar for mine. I think a rewording is in order. Gatoclass (talk) 12:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Hmm, you're quite right, it's far too close. I think this was the one piece of the article that I didn't write myself, but that's no excuse, really...I'll do this now. Vanamonde (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Gatoclass: I've rephrased it, take a look. Vanamonde (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Gatoclass: have you had a chance to look at this yet? Vanamonde (talk) 05:12, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I've checked the disputed section and a few other spotchecks throughout, and don't see any further paraphrasing issues. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
  • New reviewer requested to recheck this article for the rest of the DYK criteria, since the original review missed the close paraphrasing that has since been fixed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
  • This newly-promoted GA meets date and length requirements. The hook facts of ALT0 are cited to offline reliable sources and are backed up by other parts of the text. ALT1 is also approved but ALT2 does not have an inline citation and I have struck it. The article seems neutral and I rely on Nikkimaria's assessment with regard to the close paraphrasing issue. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:18, 9 October 2016 (UTC)