- 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 Montanabw(talk) 01:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Seumas McNally Grand Prize
Created by Hahc21 (talk) and Sven Manguard (talk). Self nominated by Hahc21 at 15:41, 6 April 2014 (UTC).
Length, hook and date ok, but can't find the confirmation to the hook fact in the indicated ref. The article also has too much OR, in both text and footnotes, which should be excised or supported with RS refs.Epeefleche (talk) 21:47, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
- Oops. Put wrong citation. However, where is the original research? I didn't say anything that cannot be verified with the sources. → Call me Hahc21 01:26, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- There are many sentences -- check both the regular text and footnotes -- that are completely uncited.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:27, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- They are uncited because they repeat what is already outlined in the table. Saying that Gish is the only game to be finalist and winner in different years can be easily seen in the table and checked with the refs there, for example. → Call me Hahc21 06:57, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- I would think that any text that states a proposition should be referenced. We do take the position that when it comes to ledes, and infoboxes, and the like, uncontroversial material need not be again cited. But I've never seen us take the position that text need not be cited, if there is a citation elsewhere. Also -- especially as this borders on synth/OR (usually, we don't say things like "Gish is the only finalist to win the prize in a subsequent edition of the festival" unless an RS thought it important enough to flag the issue ... which is what helps us keep editors from inflating the importance of things that the RSs thought non-newsworthy), I would think at minimum those sentences should be cited.Epeefleche (talk) 07:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- I disagree. It is pretty common for lists to include things like that. Take a look at Latin Grammy Award for Best Contemporary Tropical Album or Latin Grammy Award for Best Urban Music Album, both FLs. They include such information in the lead, uncited. I think you are confused. For lists, the lead does not need to cite what is already cited on the body/table. → Call me Hahc21 14:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- Can you point me to a guideline or MOS that says that? Tx. I agree that if it is in the text, that is the case (as to the lede), but I'm not aware that it is the case if it is in a table. Also, where does it say that a footnote does not need a citation? And finally, what about the OR/synth point? I think we shy away from an editor looking at stats and writing in a wp article "John was the first only Tuscan to win a ping pong championship" ... unless an RS reports on it -- which is what indicates that it is notable, to an RS.Epeefleche (talk) 16:57, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Epeefleche: Please refer to this section of the WP:SYNNOT essay. — Status (talk · contribs) 14:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks -- I'm confused, as that essay does not have the standard essay header reflecting that it is written by one or more editors but has not been formally adopted as a guideline or policy by the community at large, and may reflect a minor view. As we have, for example, in the essay Wikipedia:Don't cite essays or proposals as if they were policy. Is there a reason for that? I'll look at this more closely.
- BTW -- do we have the requisite size here? By my count, this appears to be short of our prose character size requirement, but perhaps I've missed something. Tx.Epeefleche (talk) 02:34, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
- Damn, you are correct. I forgot DYKs needed at least 1,5K of prose. → Call me Hahc21 13:27, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I will withdraw this for now. → Call me Hahc21 02:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
- I have increased the prose size to 1639. I also fixed the citations concern, although I actually hadn't read the whole discussion and didn't know that it was a point of contention when I made the edits. Anyways, this is ready for a re-review. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:33, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
- I have added myself as a co-nominator (with Hahc21's blessing), which precludes me from formally reviewing this. That being said, I reviewed this before I started editing it, and it's fine, so if someone wants an easy QPQ... Sven Manguard Wha? 18:51, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
- I guess I'll be the person that gets the easy QPQ. Everything looks good! — Status (talk · contribs) 03:39, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Was going to promote, but it looks like the QPQ by the creator has NOT been completed? (correct me if I'm wrong...) Montanabw(talk) 01:26, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- Montanabw I have an extra one. Go ahead and count Template:Did you know nominations/Zofia Daszyńska-Golińska as the QPQ for this. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Promoted. QPQ done, Montanabw(talk) 02:43, 12 April 2014 (UTC)