Template:Did you know nominations/Seventh Victim

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 ~ Rob^Talk 19:43, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Seventh Victim

(

)

... that Robert Sheckley's short story "Seventh Victim" may have inspired the live-action game Assassin?

Reviewed: National Liberation Council

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 20:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC).

Per MOS:QUOTETITLE, titles of short stories should be in quotes. Please fix both the hook and article. Also, a work being on Archive.org is not evidence of public domain. Archive.org runs off of user submissions, and much of their information may be taken from Wikipedia or other unreliable sources. Also, the entire paragraph on The Tenth Victim is unreferenced. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Wow, I always knew MOS was out of control, but this takes the cake. Addressed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:48, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Actually, reading over the MOS section, I disagree. Quotes are used for episodes/chapters/sections/etc of longer works. This is a stand-alone work, which it clearly states you should italicize at the bottom of the section. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:50, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

You continuously refer to it as a "short story", the Robert Sheckley article refers to it in quote marks, the book Reel future does as well, as does VideoHound's Groovy Movies: Far-out Films of the Psychedelic Era (one of your own sources). The MOS is unambiguous on this point ("Short stories (textual or graphic): "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge" by Ambrose Bierce"); the text "Another rule of thumb is that if the work is intended to stand alone and to be kept for later reference, or has content likely to be seen as having merit as a stand-alone work, italicize it." is in a paragraph about pamphlets, and thus "the work" is clearly meant to be "a pamphlet". — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

The MOS has required quote marks for short stories since the page on titles was created. This is not a new thing. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:28, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

The article continues to use italics rather than quoted roman (not merely MOS:QUOTETITLE, but The Chicago Manual of Style specifies this for short story titles, and quotes are used in prior articles that reference "Seventh Victim", including Hugo Award for Best Short Story and the one for Sheckley's own short stories. Both Hugo Award and Nebula Award short story articles use quotes for short story titles as do the organizations (including the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America) who run the awards. I'll ping Maury one more time in the hopes that he changes the article to match standard usage (on Wikipedia and elsewhere). BlueMoonset (talk) 01:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

OMG. The Wiki has clearly jumped the shark if we think quotes vs. italics are more important than the content of the article, which, I note, has not generated a single comment. And we wonder why content creators are disappearing in droves? Now you know. The "correct" version is a single RV click away... let's see how this goes. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The formatting of the title is part of the content (widely defined) of the article. I have tried to point you to the issue, as has Blue. That you disagree with multiple style guidelines doesn't mean that you can pretend they don't apply. Compliance with MOS:TITLES is even F7 in the supplementary guidelines for DYK.

Go ahead and click the Undo button then, the edits were already complete and are in the history. I'm pretty sure there's nothing in the guidelines that says only the nom can improve the article, is there? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The information in the article is in pretty good shape, but even then we still had to make fixes a few weeks ago, didn't we? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:56, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Right. Firstly its long enough even without the plot section. Its notable. Its referenced. 2ndly. The hook has a reference. There is no image. Its neutral. I havnt spotted under close paraphrasing. 3rdly?? As for the italics, who cares? This may be a short story, it may be a book. Its on the knife edge of an important??? decision about italics or not. Not worth debating here. Good to Go Victuallers (talk) 16:20, 7 August 2015 (UTC) (Oh I added "may have" as sources seem imprecise) Victuallers (talk) 16:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

The nuances of the Manual of Style, while important, are not a part of a DYK review. In fact, this particular nuance isn't even a part of a good article review. Holding a DYK nominated article to the standards of a featured article is unrealistic, and not what DYK is meant to be. The supplementary rule refers to the hook itself, which currently is appropriately using quotes. I certainly encourage editors to boldly make changes in the article to comply with WP:MOS if they wish. ~ Rob^Talk 19:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC)