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
BorgQueen (
talk) 15:10, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Oppose promotion the article as it has far too much self-sourced content, and that would need to be resolved first. The proposed hook also reads as promotional and uninteresting to a broad audience. (
t ·
c) buidhe 11:33, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
this is how articles about literary work is written. In an analytical framework that doesn’t require citation about the plot as its written in the book itself. See
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Novels. The hook is referenced but alternatives are welcomed
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 11:43, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
Comment: I think the hook is interesting. And per
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Plot summaries of individual works, "Because works of fiction are primary sources in their articles, basic descriptions of their plots are acceptable without reference to an outside source." That said, the "Content" section is very long (much longer than the rest of the article put together), so I can understand Buidhe's concern. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 14:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Looks more reasonable to me now – thanks. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs) 21:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Wouldn't the word "groundbreaking" in the proposed hook be considered
a peacock term, at least as how the hook is currently written?
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions) 05:27, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
We usually don't italicize stuff in the hook. And yes, even if it's quoted, care must be made to ensure that such words aren't written in Wikivoice, like they are currently.
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions) 15:20, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Long enough, new enough. All paragraphs requiring at least one reference do so. No neutrality problems found, no copyright problems found, no maintenance templates found. I propose either rewording the hook so that "groundbreaking", complete with quotes, is the last word of the hook, or taking out that part of the hook altogether (everything between "is" and "that" inclusive). And I would like to see a QPQ out of you, as you have more than five credits.--Launchballer 09:06, 1 May 2023 (UTC)