A fact from Hyun Ji Shin appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 December 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Hyun Ji Shin was photographed by Karl Lagerfeld in his Chanel campaign before his death?
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
This article was created or improved as part of the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red articles
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.
... that Hyun Ji Shin won the fourth season of Korea's Next Top Model whereas the runner-up was HoYeon Jung? Source: W Magazine (Unfortunately you only tend to find confirmation of this trivia item unless the article is about Jung. Not vice versa. But facts are facts.)
Other problems: - I am concerned with the reliability of models.com as a source for their top model rankings. The source has been discussed at RSN in the past; although that discussion concerned their usability as a source for magazine covers, there are some murmurings that content on the website may be user-generated, in which case it would not be a reliable source for a WP:BLP article. This models.com article currently cited should be fine as it looks professionally written and edited, though WP:ABOUTSELF must be complied with for anything said by the interviewee. I will start a new RSN discussion to confirm the reliability of models.com, but the source is likely to be regarded as unreliable for their ranking lists.
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Overall: Prose length is 1543 bytes, i.e. long enough, even if the content about inclusion in models.com's lists is removed. Both hooks are cited and compliant with policy, again assuming that models.com is reliable for the claim in ALT1. feminist (+)14:22, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Feminist: Models.com has a staff that collects and sorts data for most working models' careers hence why they do these lists to determine who they consider the "top 50" (seems like when the pandemic started they removed their reasoning for each choice but I don’t know if that was the causation) and other lists like "the hot list", "new supers", "industry icons", etc.; New York magazine used to do something similar but they abandoned their efforts nearly 10 years ago and the relics of that information are obsolete and close to impossible to recapture without the Wayback Machine. Unfortunately, there are editors unfamiliar with the fashion space who believe models.com is akin to IMDb where users and therefore unreliable, but that's not true at all. Users can’t change any content or add trivia. The only thing most registered users can do is view all pages of a subject's work and vote in the Model of the Year contest. The Top 50 list isn’t definitive, it’s more of an aggregation of professional opinion, like Bloomberg’s Billionaire Index vs. Forbes’s. The website’s editor is the one who does the interviews. Trillfendi (talk) 15:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
given that no other editors so far seems to have any issue with how the source is used in the article. Promoters can of course exercise their discretion. feminist (+)06:05, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I am concerned with the reliability of models.com as a source for their top model rankings. The source has been discussed at RSN in the past; although that discussion concerned their usability as a source for magazine covers, there are some murmurings that content on the website may be user-generated, in which case it would not be a reliable source for a WP:BLP article. This models.com article currently cited should be fine as it looks professionally written and edited, though WP:ABOUTSELF must be complied with for anything said by the interviewee. I will start a new RSN discussion to confirm the reliability of models.com, but the source is likely to be regarded as unreliable for their ranking lists.
Prose length is 1543 bytes, i.e. long enough, even if the content about inclusion in models.com's lists is removed. Both hooks are cited and compliant with policy, again assuming that models.com is reliable for the claim in ALT1. feminist (+) 14:22, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
given that no other editors so far seems to have any issue with how the source is used in the article. Promoters can of course exercise their discretion. feminist (+) 06:05, 13 November 2021 (UTC)