Talk:Marco Raina

Did you know nomination

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: rejected by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 00:11, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Gaming the system for DYK purposes should not be rewarded. I understand that there's a feeling of remorse, but if there's a desire to make up for it, there's always next nomination.

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that goalkeeper Marco Raina made his professional debut for Juventus Next Gen after getting more than 65 bench appearances, including one from the first team? Source: https://it.soccerway.com/players/marco-raina/632641/
  • ALT1: ... that goalkeeper Marco Raina was first called up by Juventus first-team in December 2021, when he would make his professional debut, with Juventus Next Gen, only in October 2022? Source: https://www.juventusnews24.com/esordio-raina-juve-next-gen-albinoleffe-messaggio/ https://www.cuneo24.it/2021/12/il-dronerese-marco-raina-convocato-in-prima-squadra-dalla-juventus-138227/
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hesper Mews
  • Comment: Soccerway says he'd had 66 benches but the site does not include Coppa Italia Serie C stats, when it should. He'd had some Coppa Italia Serie C benches, so putting "more than 65" would really be a good idea. Otherwise, ALT can be chosen.

Created by Dr Salvus (talk). Self-nominated at 23:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC).

• More of a comment, but is there a way to simplify ALT0? I think it has the most promise out of the two hook proposals but it's quite hard to read and get the idea, especially for people who aren't necessarily football fans. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
• Narutolovehinata5, what's not clear? Dr Salvus 06:49, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

It's not that it's not clear, it's more of the hook is so long that it's a bit difficult to get the main idea (that he made his professional debut after going over 65 bench appearances without playing) on the first read. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:05, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Narutolovehinata5, have shortened. There would still be ALT1. Dr Salvus 08:30, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

• Thank you, but this still needs a full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
• General eligibility:
• New enough:
• Long enough:
• Other problems: - n

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
• Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article's text sounds awkward to me, and SounderBruce tagged it as needing to be rewritten. I do think that it would be best for SounderBruce to explain what needs to be done, only because I barely ever edit sports articles. SL93 (talk) 18:59, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

The whole career section reads very awkwardly, as if it was translated without copyediting. Passages like "However, in September 2019 was already being called up", "following to Mattia Perin's absence", and "been in contact with a COVID-19 positive" are among the most problematic. SounderBruce 03:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I've cheated a bit. I wanted to add much unnecessary info to have the article award and to remove it after being in main page. Lfstevens has managed to clean it up keeping the 1500 required characters. He deserves to be among the nominators for this article. Dr Salvus 05:42, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

This needs a new reviewer. I will not review an article for someone who admitted to cheating the system. SL93 (talk) 13:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Honesty is a virtue. What if I hadn't told you I cheated? Dr Salvus 14:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Then I wouldn't have known. SL93 (talk) 14:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

You say that, but doing such a thing is a lie in itself. SL93 (talk) 20:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

• as requested by SL93, here is a new review: I think the nominator's own admission that he is looking to game the system implies that there's simply not enough material of note to warrant an appearance on the main page. I am therefore inclined to fail the nomination unless much more substantial material is somehow added to the article. Moreover, some of the sources currently being referenced seem somewhat dubious. Disappointing to see, considering that the nominator has been around for a couple of years. Nuff said, Kingoflettuce (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Agreed. I don't think we should be rewarding attempts to game the system, especially if the nominator has admitted to doing so. If an article isn't going to be long enough to make it to DYK without adding information that were stretches, it's better to not nominate it at all. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I have read the previous version of the article again and I noticed it didn't have so much unnecessary information. So, yes, I did want to cheat the system but I reached my objective without malice, although I thought I cheated. This leads me of promising of never trying of cheating again. I can reach the 1500 characters without malice.

I'll try to ask a friend to review this without cheating if everyone boycotts me.

I think Lfstevens too made some mistakes, he didn't recognise some notable info and keept some unnotable info and made some mistakes caused by inexperience in editing football articles. But no one told him to be perfect. Dr Salvus 00:07, 27 November 2022 (UTC)