Template:Did you know nominations/Star Trek: Enterprise (season 4)

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 PFHLai (talk) 21:57, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Star Trek: Enterprise (season 4)[edit]

5x expanded by Miyagawa (talk). Self nominated at 01:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Created from redirect and nominated on the same day, and the prose is over 15k, easily satisfying length and date criteria. Reference 6 makes no mention of Braga being an executive producer, but is used to support the claim. In the section "Episode arcs", it's stated that "did not reveal the identity of future guy", but the ref is a season preview that states they may or may not; please use a ref that states this definitively. In the same section, Protestant Reformation is mentioned, but the quotation from the ref compares Surak to Martin Luther, not the civil war to the reformation. I am assuming good faith on offline and paywalled sources (Highbeam et al). In the "Accolades" section, Emmy nominations are mentioned, but results are not (though they are in the intro). Otherwise, the refs are fine, though I'd prefer to see refs to the original source instead of startrek.com copies of those refs. (For example, the first ref is a copy from TV Guide, volume 52, issue 25, page 9.) Hook is short and interesting, and has a citation in the text; citation is to paywalled Highbeam article, so I'll assume good faith for that one. Mindmatrix 02:11, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Forgot to note that QPQ was completed. Mindmatrix 22:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I've added a couple of citations and some further lines to the article to cover the future guy and Emmy points. I haven't added anything regarding the reformation point because I think it already covers it. Coto calls it a "Vulcan Reformation" and compares T'Pol to Martin Luther and the Vulcans to the Catholic Church. So I think that's good enough to say it's the protestant reformation he's talk about about. Regarding the TV Guide point - I'm not a big fan of linking to sources that I haven't seen personally as I can't complete the citation templates (for example, I don't know what the title of the TV Guide article would be). Miyagawa (talk) 20:23, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Thanks for the new sources. My main concern about the reformation is that it can be considered synthesis, but in this case the concept is strongly suggested in the sources, so I'll leave it as is. Regarding the sourcing to startrek.com, I wasn't suggesting you cite sources you haven't read; rather, that I'd prefer the original sources be tracked down and referenced where possible, as there is no assurance the third-party source hasn't changed it, engaged in selective quoting, or misrepresented it somehow. I don't think it has been done in this case, but in general such sources shouldn't be used. Mindmatrix 21:19, 8 January 2014 (UTC)