Jump to content

Talk:Milton (federal electoral district)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 SL93 (talk) 08:33, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Adam van Koeverden
Adam van Koeverden
  • Comment: This is my first DYK nom, no QPQ necessary, the picture is for ALT2. I don't have a preference for either of the hooks.

The expansion was moved from a userspace draft. 5x expanded by Username6892 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • New? Yes. Fivefold expansion on 19 June UTC from this (530 B prose) to this (2899 B prose). (Via WP:PROSESIZE.)
  • Long enough? Yes. 2,899 words of prose is definitely long enough!
  • Within policy? Looks good to me – details, in part, a hotly contested election between the Conservatives and Liberals with an objective tone. Cites mostly well-known newspapers and official government documents.
  • Hook:? Alt2 looks most broadly interesting to me, and it's cited with a direct reference to the election returns from Elections Canada. At a quick scan of the Macleans article, I didn't see the particular poll you mentioned. This quotes Raitt as saying the race was "tight", fwiw. Alts 1–2 are sourced with official sources and accurate, but maybe won't be as broadly interesting.
  • QPQ: I don't know how to verify this, but I trust Username6892 when they say they are exempt.
  • Image: It's own-work CC-by-SA at Commons, so I assume that's fine, and it looks great at small size.
I would promote, using alt2 and the great image. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:38, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's more of making the hook eye-catching to a broader audience, especially non-Canadians. Mentioning that van Koeverden was an Olympic canoeing champion might raise more eyebrows than simply mentioning that he is a Liberal politician. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • This has been sitting here for over four weeks with no progress, and there is still no icon to indicate what the status is. Requesting a second opinion review and first icon. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:22, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding ALT0, the sources do not indicate the conflict suggested by using "despite". ALT1 and ALT2 are accurate as sourced, although Narutolovehinata5 did make a suggestion for ALT2 above to increase its hookiness. Username6892, do you have further comment on that?
@Chipmunkdavis: What about an ALT2a:... that despite a riding poll showing that the 2019 election in Milton would be a tossup, Liberal candidate and former Olympian Adam van Koeverden (pictured) won by a margin of 15%? (Note that I prefer ALT2(a) or a variation of it) Username6892 18:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On the article, the lead mentions the district was created in a 2012 redistribution, but follows on by discussing a victor in 2011, which doesn't make sense. I see the explanation later in the article, but including it in the lead may be confusing. The "Profile" section mentions Milton the town, and goes on to discuss population change without clarifying whether this population is that of the town or that of the district. I suggest rewording "won against Raitt by 15% and won a majority of votes" for those who are unfamiliar with the electoral system and thus might not understand the relevance of mentioning both of those facts. CMD (talk) 10:19, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
For the 2011 victory, I clarified that it was a redistributed result. For the profile, I clarified that it was about the district, not the town. I invite you to review my rewording of the final point of concern. Username6892 18:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you prefer ALT2a that is fine with me. Would you consider removing the word "riding" as unnecessary and likely misleading to those unfamiliar with Canadian terminology? I've tweaked the lead to remove the "although" and made a couple of other copyedits. Let me know if these made sense, and whether you want the word riding, otherwise I think this is good to go. CMD (talk) 13:27, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis: Here's another modification:... that despite a poll showing that the 2019 election in the Milton electoral district would be a tossup, Liberal candidate and former Olympian Adam van Koeverden (pictured) won by a margin of 15%? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Username6892 (talk • contribs) 13:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2b below. CMD (talk) 14:39, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2b:... that despite a poll showing that the 2019 election in the Milton electoral district would be a tossup, Liberal candidate and former Olympian Adam van Koeverden (pictured) won by a margin of 15%?
The photo of Adam van Koeverden (pictured) is nowhere to be found in this article on the riding. Flibirigit (talk) 00:41, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Flibirigit: I've added it, though if you believe that the photo doesn't belong with the hook, you may ask for it to be removed. Username6892 01:21, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The photo is required to be in the article to be eligible to be in the hook, as per DYK rules. All images in the article are properly licensed on the commons, and the photo of Adam van Koeverden is clear at a low resolution and appropriate for the hook. Restoring approval as per above. Flibirigit (talk) 01:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Milton_(federal_electoral_district)&oldid=1257008179"