Content deleted Content added
Andrew Davidson (talk | contribs) comment |
No, our objectives aren't aligned at all |
||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
:*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Please first write a decent article and then ask us to nominate it. Nothing has been done on it since the nomination. He is mainly notable for one thing, the false story about the tomato. ''Nothing'' is said about this in the article, even though it is mentioned in the lead and in the hook. The article also totally omits his political career. Basically, posting this on the main page would be a disservice to our readers. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
:*[[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Please first write a decent article and then ask us to nominate it. Nothing has been done on it since the nomination. He is mainly notable for one thing, the false story about the tomato. ''Nothing'' is said about this in the article, even though it is mentioned in the lead and in the hook. The article also totally omits his political career. Basically, posting this on the main page would be a disservice to our readers. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 13:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
||
::* As indicated in the comments, I am already well aware that there's more to do here and I intend to do this once I've dealt with some other, more pressing, articles such as [[Althea McNish]]. But, in any case, DYK is explicitly open to incomplete work per [[WP:DYK]]: "''DYK is not: A smaller-scale version of either featured content or Good Articles, though selected Good Articles do appear in the DYK box. Articles must meet the basic criteria set out on this page but do not have to be of very high quality. It is fine for articles to be incomplete (though not unfinished), to have red links, to be capable of being expanded or improved further, and so on.''" So, please leave this pending for now and I'll request another review when I've made another round of editing, which will add the specific content mentioned by Fram. I'd like this article to look good when it reaches the main page too and so our objectives are aligned. [[user:Andrew Davidson|Andrew D.]] ([[user talk:Andrew Davidson|talk]]) 14:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
::* As indicated in the comments, I am already well aware that there's more to do here and I intend to do this once I've dealt with some other, more pressing, articles such as [[Althea McNish]]. But, in any case, DYK is explicitly open to incomplete work per [[WP:DYK]]: "''DYK is not: A smaller-scale version of either featured content or Good Articles, though selected Good Articles do appear in the DYK box. Articles must meet the basic criteria set out on this page but do not have to be of very high quality. It is fine for articles to be incomplete (though not unfinished), to have red links, to be capable of being expanded or improved further, and so on.''" So, please leave this pending for now and I'll request another review when I've made another round of editing, which will add the specific content mentioned by Fram. I'd like this article to look good when it reaches the main page too and so our objectives are aligned. [[user:Andrew Davidson|Andrew D.]] ([[user talk:Andrew Davidson|talk]]) 14:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
||
:::*Well, no, our objectives aren't aligned. Your objective is to a) have this article as a DYK and b) have it finished to a basic acceptable state at some date in the future. My objective is to have a) articles with a basic acceptable state, and b) only if they then also meet DYK standards, to have them as a DYK. The priority is the article, not the DYK, and you seem to have completely reversed that, leaving an article woefully incomplete for weeks (or longer) in the mainspace without any problem, as long as it meets the newness and length criteria of DYK so you can nominate it. Using [[Althea McNish]](your only edit: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Althea_McNish&type=revision&diff=710185107&oldid=710028526]) as an excuse is pretty weak. I do notice the first comment at [[Template:Did you know nominations/Althea McNish]], which you co-created: "Em, you two seem to be considerably experienced editors, so you should have known better than to submit something like this." I'm not asking for a GA, far from it, but a DYK article, certainly by well-estalished editors with sufficient DYK credits already, should meet the basic requirements of what an article should be like, not just the very minimal literal DYK requirements. An article that has facts in the lead which aren't explained further in the body is one of the most basic fails. An article which goes on at length about the background, but skips the essentials completely, is even worse. If you don't have enough time to finish these articles before submitting them (to the mainspace and to DYK), use your sandbox or the Draft namespace instead. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 15:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC) |
|||
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
Revision as of 15:12, 16 March 2016
Robert Gibbon Johnson
- ... that Colonel Johnson (pictured) was imprisoned by the British when seven years old but became famous for eating tomatoes?
- Comment: Lots more to do still but getting this nominated while it's fresh
- Reviewed: Guy ropes
Created by Andrew Davidson (talk). Self-nominated at 22:17, 6 March 2016 (UTC).
- Please first write a decent article and then ask us to nominate it. Nothing has been done on it since the nomination. He is mainly notable for one thing, the false story about the tomato. Nothing is said about this in the article, even though it is mentioned in the lead and in the hook. The article also totally omits his political career. Basically, posting this on the main page would be a disservice to our readers. Fram (talk) 13:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- As indicated in the comments, I am already well aware that there's more to do here and I intend to do this once I've dealt with some other, more pressing, articles such as Althea McNish. But, in any case, DYK is explicitly open to incomplete work per WP:DYK: "DYK is not: A smaller-scale version of either featured content or Good Articles, though selected Good Articles do appear in the DYK box. Articles must meet the basic criteria set out on this page but do not have to be of very high quality. It is fine for articles to be incomplete (though not unfinished), to have red links, to be capable of being expanded or improved further, and so on." So, please leave this pending for now and I'll request another review when I've made another round of editing, which will add the specific content mentioned by Fram. I'd like this article to look good when it reaches the main page too and so our objectives are aligned. Andrew D. (talk) 14:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
- Well, no, our objectives aren't aligned. Your objective is to a) have this article as a DYK and b) have it finished to a basic acceptable state at some date in the future. My objective is to have a) articles with a basic acceptable state, and b) only if they then also meet DYK standards, to have them as a DYK. The priority is the article, not the DYK, and you seem to have completely reversed that, leaving an article woefully incomplete for weeks (or longer) in the mainspace without any problem, as long as it meets the newness and length criteria of DYK so you can nominate it. Using Althea McNish(your only edit: [1]) as an excuse is pretty weak. I do notice the first comment at Template:Did you know nominations/Althea McNish, which you co-created: "Em, you two seem to be considerably experienced editors, so you should have known better than to submit something like this." I'm not asking for a GA, far from it, but a DYK article, certainly by well-estalished editors with sufficient DYK credits already, should meet the basic requirements of what an article should be like, not just the very minimal literal DYK requirements. An article that has facts in the lead which aren't explained further in the body is one of the most basic fails. An article which goes on at length about the background, but skips the essentials completely, is even worse. If you don't have enough time to finish these articles before submitting them (to the mainspace and to DYK), use your sandbox or the Draft namespace instead. Fram (talk) 15:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)