Template:Did you know nominations/Leyb Gorfinkel

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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: rejected by Allen3 talk 09:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues

DYK toolbox

Leyb Gorfinkel[edit]

(
)

Created by Futurist110 (talk). Self nominated at 03:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC).

I have now reviewed this DYK? nomination -- Template:Did you know nominations/Velodona. Futurist110 (talk) 04:13, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Velodona does not qualify as a QPQ per DYK review instructions please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed. — Maile (talk) 13:15, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
I have now reviewed this DYK? nomination as my QPQ for this -- Template:Did you know nominations/Batei Munkacz. Futurist110 (talk) 08:34, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Checked New QPQ well done. — Maile (talk) 15:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
  • The following has been checked in this review by Matty.007
  • QPQ taken care of
  • Article created by Futurist110 on 17 January 2014, and has 2551 characters of readable prose
  • Every paragraph is sourced- I think YIVO is a reliable source, and will AGF that it is, it seems to be from university profs, but there is a bit of a tangent on the about page
  • Earwig @ Toolserver found no copyvios, I think it is far enough away from the sources to be passable
  • I'm not 100% sure that 'Fortunately' is neutrally worded, but I would like Futurist's opinion
  • I would like an infobox, but it's not something to hold up the DYK for
  • Where did his exact birth and death dates come from? They are not in the source given, and source 2 gives a different birth date; the same with his nationality as far as I can tell, not backed up in given source
  • Hook is interesting and well sourced
  • Just a couple of issues to sort out. Matty.007 19:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
  • The page is nearly all based on the YIVO source, and follows that source line by line in its presentation. The page creator needs to rewrite the whole thing in his own words, even presenting information by subject rather than by chronological order, to avoid this close paraphrasing. Alternatively, it would help to add in more sources. Yoninah (talk) 00:58, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: Furthermore, the QPQ was not satisfactorily completed; Futurist110 has had to redo other such QPQs because this was basically "good to go" without any explanation of what was checked; the valid review was done by Maile. Matty.007, Yoninah's having found close paraphrasing is another indication that Earwig's "copyvio" check should not be used in DYK reviews any longer as evidence that there isn't close paraphrasing. It has been removed from the DYK tools for good reason. (Also, infoboxes are sometimes controversial, and in any event are not a DYK criterion.) BlueMoonset (talk) 06:42, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
I didn't use the copyvio check, I now use the dup det. I saw that it had a similar layout, but I wasn't 100% sure how closely we are allowed to follow sources, and having multiple sources isn't a requirement as far as I am aware. Matty.007 06:45, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Also, he did redo QOQ, I'm not sure if you saw the link higher in the page where he addressed issues. Matty.007 06:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • The dup detector is practically worthless. I usually check the original against the article and here I saw how it followed line by line, often using the same words. Yoninah (talk) 13:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Matty.007, you're right, I did miss the replacement QPQ; my apologies. If you use the duplication detector, then your review shouldn't say you used Earwig's tool. Yoninah, given the number of instances of close paraphrasing I've found using duplication detector, it's hardly "practically worthless". It is not good for detecting structural close paraphrasing, however, so as you note it's always a good idea to look at sources right after you've read the article you're reviewing—structural similarities will be apparent then. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I copy paste the basic thing and change it so that I check it all. Thanks, Matty.007 17:23, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
  • No problem, Matty.007. You might want to update your boilerplate the next time you copy/paste so future copy/pastes won't mention Earwig's copyvio. I've just struck my incorrect comment about the QPQ. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:59, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Changed. Thanks, Matty.007 11:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Please give me a(n additional) day or two to deal with all of these issues. Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 23:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Plus, I need to have some time to read everything which is written here. Futurist110 (talk) 23:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • It has been five weeks since Yoninah first identified the YIVO issue, and thirteen days since Futurist110 asked for an additional day or two. Given recent edits elsewhere rather than here, I'm afraid time has run out for this nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Leyb_Gorfinkel&oldid=599561376"