Template:Did you know nominations/Little David Records

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) 23:30, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Little David Records, The Devil Made Me Buy This Dress, Geraldine Jones (character)

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

... that Little David's first record, The Devil Made Me Buy This Dress, was named for a line spoken by Flip Wilson's character Geraldine?

Reviewed: {{flatlist|

Comment: This is a three-article DYK. Two of the articles were started on May 26, the other on May 27. The Little David article was born of a redirect.

Created by Binksternet (talk). Self nominated at 01:33, 28 May 2014 (UTC).

QPQ

Three QPQs done for this triple nom, all accepted.--Storye book (talk) 09:41, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Article 1: Little David Records

New enough (created 26 May and nominated 28 May) and long enough. Image in article is fair-use, and licensing is OK. No disambig links; no access problems with external links. The text is written in an objective and neutral manner. It is well-cited in general, but see issue 1.1. Links in citations 1-18 checked for copyvio and sources of close paraphrasing, using dup detector tool, but none found (I have not checked 19-35). Issues: (1.1) 5 paragraphs have no citation at the end. (1.2) The details of the Sullivan 2010 source which are currently in reference #12 should be moved to a new Bibliography section below References, and (if you wish) formatted for bibliography. You could then have the Sullivan 2010 references (cites 6, 9, 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23, 32 and 33) formatted so that they highlight the correct item in Bibliography when you click on those refs. For example, see Linking inline and full citations. It doesn't matter how you do this so long as you are consistent within the article, but the general requirement is to put the extended book cite in the bibliography, and the brief cites with page numbers in the refs section. Summary: if issues 1.1 and 1.2 can be resolved, this article will be OK (if hook is OK).--Storye book (talk) 09:41, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your thorough review! I have moved the full Sullivan citation to the position of the first Sullivan reference. Otherwise, my chosen citation style is one of Wikipedia's several acceptable styles. The DYK rules state that "articles with good references and citations are preferred." The citation style I chose is one that can be found in many Featured Articles, for instance Jay Pritzker Pavilion. The supplemental rules require that inline cited sources should be present, with one cite per paragraph as the "rule of thumb"—a rule that I have satisfied. The DYK rules do not ask for a reference at the end of each paragraph. Binksternet (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Binksternet. All issues for this article are now resolved. --Storye book (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Article 2: The Devil Made Me Buy This Dress

New enough (created 26 May and nominated 28 May) and long enough. Image in article is fair-use, and licensing is OK. No disambig links found. No problem with access to external links. The text is objective and neutral, and is fully cited. External links in all citations checked for sources of copyvio or close paraphrasing; none found. Issue: (2.1) The link "American" in the header should go to Americans, not to United States (this minor issue does not affect DYK nomination). This nom would have passed DYK (assuming hook is OK). --Storye book (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Excellent suggestion. I changed "United States" to "Americans" per your advice. Binksternet (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, Binksternet. All issues for this article are resolved. --Storye book (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Article 3: Geraldine Jones (character)

New enough (created 27 May and nominated 28 May) and long enough. Image in article is fair-use, and licensing is OK. No disambig links found. External links for citations work OK. The text style is objective and neutral in general, but see issue 3.1. All external links for citations checked for sources of copyvio and close paraphrasing, using dup detector tool; none found. Issues: (3.1). I am surprised that the Origins section deals only with the high-pitched voice of the characterisation and the name of Geraldine - yet other, arguably more important, material is contained in citation #2, which is not used as a source for this section. In citation #2, Wilson says that his inspiration for this character was his admiration for women like her, and he gives details of aspects that he admires ("pride", "dedication", "strong", "freedom"). The use of the male upper register to imitate women has in the past often been used, however gentle the intention, for mockery, i.e. the high-pitched voice in this context can frequently encourage an audience to laugh at women as viewed by men. So currently the Origin section, lacking information about Wilson's admiration for women like Geraldine, can give the wrong impression that Wilson wanted the audience to laugh at Geraldine, and not with her. That omission, IMO, constitutes a potential neutrality problem. So please could you kindly consider adding a quote from citation #2, demonstrating Wilson's admiration for women of Geraldine's type (as he understood it)? If issue 3.1 can be resolved, this article nom should be OK. --Storye book (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

In this little bit of expansion I have added a paragraph about Geraldine's strength, pride and freedom. More could be added, of course, but my free time this morning grows short. Binksternet (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Binksternet. All issues for this article are now resolved. --Storye book (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Hook

The hook is acceptable and short enough. Issue: Just one problem with its citation and inclusion in each article. I've read the articles and understand the hook to be true, but it needs to be written out in each article together with its citation(s); remember that most readers pulled in by the front-page hook will not bother to plough through all three articles in full, and some may just click the DYK hook and then immediately do a page search.--Storye book (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder! The hook has been cited directly in all three articles.1. 2. 3. Binksternet (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Binksternet. All issues are now resolved for the hook, and it is sourced to an online citation.--Storye book (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

General comments

My initial review of this triple nom is now complete --Storye book (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Please help us to navigate through this potentially complex triple nom. Please write comments about article/QPQ/hook in the relevant article section above. Please write comments about combined or general matters here. Thank you for your co-operation. --Storye book (talk) 12:27, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

All issues for this review are resolved; please see separate sections of review above. Good to go. --Storye book (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2014 (UTC)