Template:Did you know nominations/Sally Tanner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
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 BlueMoonset (talk) 05:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Sally Tanner[edit]


Created/expanded by Ellin Beltz (talk). Self nom at 01:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I would like to use this image File:Lemon.jpg but I don't know how to go backwards in the template to do that. I'm sorry this is only my third DYK and I am still learning.Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:53, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I've added the image, but I'm not sure of the purpose- a play on Lemon law? The image also has to be used in the article and it's not currently. Froggerlaura ribbit 02:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg The article and the hook are too non-specific about California's lemon law. A reader could assume it's a law about California lemon groves, especially with that image. An image of lemons isn't anymore about the law, than it is about lemon-scented furniture polish - not relevant. Your article gives one non-specific sentence to the lemon law being passed, but it tells the reader nothing about what that is. The link in the article points to a page about the laws that have that nickname, but that article doesn't even mention California's law. What is the law's actual name? What does it do? Why was it passed? There should be some explanation in the article, since it is relevant to Sally Tanner's legislative career. Wikisource might have some helpful information. Maile66 (talk) 13:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Here's the article on the so-called California lemon law: California AB 1215, Maile66 (talk) 13:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC) And maybe not. California AB 1215 is too recent to have been connected with Sally Tanner. But it would be helpful to find the law. Maile66 (talk) 13:22, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
QPQ is still needed List of United States federal officials convicted of corruption offenses was already reviewed and approved to go by hamiltonstone before you added your name as a reviewer. Please pick another nomination that no one else has already approved to review as a QPQ. Maile66 (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Ellin Beltz still has fewer than 5 DYK credits, so a quid-pro-quo (QPQ) review is not required yet. Re-reviewing and confirming an already-approved hook is good practice for DYK reviewing, but Maile66's advice will need to be followed when QPQ is required. --Orlady (talk) 16:48, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thank you everyone for all your help on the article!
  • Ooops, on the image, I didn't know it was required also in the article.
  • I am still under 5 DYKs and still learning, but will later go and review a DYK submission that has no approvals so far. Again, another thing I didn't know that I learned by DYKing.
  • I have fixed the section in Sally Tanner about the Lemon Law, hopefully explaining it in more detail and with citations including that the actual law has Ms. Tanner's name in it, which was something else I didn't know before.

Again, thank you to everyone, the process of writing for Wikipedia - especially new articles is vastly improved by the DYK review process. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC) I am taking notes of everything I learn and won't repeat the errors, I hope.

  • Symbol redirect vote4.png YAY! You did good, Ellin Beltz. I can look at that article and get an understanding of what California's Lemon Law is. I expanded your lead a little beyond a singular sentence. Because I have now been involved as an editor of this article, someone else needs to review it.
Maile66 (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg New enough, long enough, hook fact is verified, plenty of footnotes, and I did not find evidence of close paraphrasing or other forms of copyvio. However, the image can't be used. --Orlady (talk) 02:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)