Jump to content

Talk:Rick Suder

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 Edge3 (talk02:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 17:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Rick Suder; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Hook as written doesn't really say anything and the wording is confusing. Did Redick and McNamara physically bump him? Why is it interesting that Suder was passed in the record books? I made some direct edits to the article and added ALT1 hook as an option for a more descriptive hook. Would also improve the inline citing of your sourcing in the article. -— Preceding unsigned comment added by Longhornsg (talkcontribs) 03:17, March 21, 2023 (UTC) --TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That would probably not pass WP:DYKSG#C2, or at least the spirit of it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really understand your point, which I think is suppose to be guiding the structure of my hook presentation.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:45, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any of the proposed hooks are going to seem significant to readers unfamiliar with basketball and who don't know who JJ Redick is. That was the point I was making. If anything, their mention distracts from the main point and makes the hooks less accessible to general audiences (remember that we write even for audiences who aren't into basketball). It might be better to just leave their mentions out and just focus on the Top 25 thing without other names. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
JJ Redick is a surefire National Collegiate Basketball Hall of Fame for people who follow the sport. I.e., most people who know basketball, know him and would be intrigued by Suder's link to Redick. However, the mention of his name is not likely to detract attention from the hook of those who don't know the sport. I have presented an ALT3 and object to its use because it seems ridiculous to anonymize Redicks identity.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • New reviewer needed to look at hooks and other issues raised by the original reviewer and others. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:44, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Everything's in order. I'm with TonyTheTiger on this, I think ALT0 is the best of the four hooks; I personally would spell out "National Collegiate Athletic Association", but that's a minor fix, probably not worth holding this up much longer.--Launchballer 16:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To Prep 7 Edge3 (talk) 02:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]


GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Rick Suder/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 00:10, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Will review.  LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 00:10, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On hold; over to you!  LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 23:41, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am satisfied with the changes made and can now confidently pass this great article for GA status. Congrats!  LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 16:41, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio check

[edit]

Earwig says good to go. No concerns from me either.

Prose

[edit]

Refs

[edit]

Passes spotcheck.

Others

[edit]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.