Talk:Murder of Jiang Ge

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: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 13:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the murder of Jiang Ge was considered controversial in China due to actions of her roommate during her murder? Source: Characteristics and Mechanism of Group Polarization in the Era of Mobile Internet: A Content Analysis Based on Media Texts and Netizen Comments on Jiang Ge case by Huang He & Kang Ning (2019) and Chinese Netizens Play Moral Jury in Tokyo Murder Case
  • ALT1: ... that the murder of Jiang Ge led to public debate in China on the actions of her roommate during her murder? Source: Characteristics and Mechanism of Group Polarization in the Era of Mobile Internet: A Content Analysis Based on Media Texts and Netizen Comments on Jiang Ge case by Huang He & Kang Ning (2019) and Chinese Netizens Play Moral Jury in Tokyo Murder Case
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Lebanese liquidity crisis bank robberies and sit-ins

Created by Toadboy123 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Murder of Jiang Ge; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Recent move at the time of nomination. Length sufficient and referencing adequate. Main source cited for hook is Sixth Tone, state owned media, but I think this isn't a sufficiently political topic for it to be considered unreliable. AGF on the other Mandarin sources. Hooks interesting, prefer ALT1. QPQ done, and copyvio not detected (aside from a quoted statement by the court). Good to go. Juxlos (talk) 13:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
• unpromoted due to questions about sourcing. See WT:DYK. RoySmith (talk) 14:45, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  • @RoySmith, Viriditas, and Narutolovehinata5: I don't really get the objection. Which part of the DYK guidelines did this hook violate? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
    • The hook fact should be cited in the article, no later than the end of the sentence it appears in. as explained in the thread on WT:DYK. RoySmith (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

@Viriditas, RoySmith, Narutolovehinata5, AirshipJungleman29, and Juxlos: Sorry for the late response as I did not get notified regarding the status of my hook here. I have made the changes in the article to ensure the hook is explicitly mentioned at Public opinion of the case in China section and also integrated the source from the external link into the article. Let me know if the article is good to go for DYK. Toadboy123 (talk) 05:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

@Toadboy123: Much better, but you have to duplicate the citation at the end of the hook, not at the end of the paragraph alone. I've made the same mistake many times (just this last week, in fact). This comes up a lot because it's so confusing as nominators. In our minds, we think "oh, I already have a cite at the end of the paragraph", forgetting that it needs to be at the end of the sentence as well for DYK. In the future, there should be a way to automate this, such that the bot recognizes the exact hook and identifies the source, making the rule unnecessary, but we aren't there yet. Viriditas (talk) 19:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks like it is good to go based on this new edit:[1] Viriditas (talk) 08:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Length, history and reference verified. Good to go ... it's been a while. Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 15 December 2023 (UTC)