The following is an archived discussion of Dami Mission's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination's(talk) page, the nominated article's(talk) page, or the DYK WikiProject's(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page.See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.
The result was: promoted by Miyagawa (talk) 18:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
... that the founder of the Dami Mission church predicted the world would end on October 28, 1992, but used donations from his followers to purchase bonds that did not mature until after that date?
Created/expanded by Freikorp (talk). Self nominated at 06:05, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Newly created: Yes, it was created on 30 December 2012 and nominated on 4 January 2012, exactly five days. Article size: Good enough. Copyright/Close-paraphrasing: There aren't any obvious violations anymore. I gave the article some trimming because I enjoyed reading it. Hook: Well sourced and interesting. This is good to go. ComputerJA (talk) 08:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
I can't believe I didn't catch this prior to promoting it a few minutes ago, but the date of the prediction is wrong: it was October 28, 1992, not October 22 as stated in the hook and article. And, once I checked a bit further, I found that there is still far too much close paraphrasing for my comfort. Compare, for example, the article's "based off a vision which came to a 16 year old boy" with "based on a vision that came to a 16-year-old boy" from this source, and the identical phrases "police took elaborate precautions to ensure that mass suicides would not occur" from both the article and this newspaper. A great deal of work remains to be done before this article is at DYK standards. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Fixed the date error - my bad. I don't know how that happened - I must of have misread it the first time and then just got it in my head and stuck with it. I've reworded the mass suicide sentence mentioned above. I've also reworded the "vision" mention and added a wikilink for clarity. If there is anything else wrong with the article please let me know and I will fix it. Freikorp (talk) 00:30, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I have since gone through the entire article and after making several changes I believe the article is now free from close paraphrasing and errors. Freikorp (talk) 01:25, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I think there's still quite a bit of closeness in phrasing and structure. Compare for example "Eight minutes later, two girls told reporters they had never believed in the rapture, and said that their parents were inside the building crying because they were still there" with "Eight minutes later, two girls...told reporters they never believed in the Rapture anyway, although their parents were inside, crying in despair because they had not been lifted", or "Mainstream churches in South Korea denounced the prediction as blasphemy, and civil authorities labelled the Dami Mission as a dangerous cult" with "condemned as blasphemy by mainstream churches and by civil authorities as a dangerous cult", or "hit by a sudden surge in deserters and applications for early discharge, and subsequently announced they would begin screening all material brought into the barracks by soldiers" with "hit by a sudden surge in deserters and applications for early discharge, recently announced that it would begin screening all material being carried into the barracks by soldiers". Nikkimaria (talk) 22:21, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I've reworded the "Eight minutes later" sentence and the 'army deserters' sentence. I haven't reworded the 'mainstream churches' sentence as I don't see how I could reword that very much considering information on this particular subject is limited to one line in the reference (also considering that I think the sentence is a fair rewording myself, but that's just my opinion). I'm happy for anybody else to try rewording it or incorporating it elsewhere. If that sentence is the only thing holding this nomination back I will gladly delete it in order to get this nomination passed.
This is my first serious attempt to nominate an article for DYK, so I don't have any experience in this. Accordingly I can't see anything wrong with the article, so please just be specific in telling me what needs improving and I will work on it myself immediately. Freikorp (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I (a transient journey-gnome) have copyedited for grammar and readability, and hope that it now addresses the points above. Therefore I request that another editor review suitability for DYK. Regards. Chienlit (talk) 15:53, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I've made some further edits to deal with remaining paraphrasing issues, so a new reviewer is needed to verify that all necessary improvements have been made. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to Chienlit and Nikkimaria, this article is now good to go. No other close paraphrasing that I could see, references check out, hook is verified and cited, long enough, new enough. Go go go! Moswentotalky 10:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)