Template:Did you know nominations/3 Bahadur
- 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 00:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Does not meet newness criteria for DYK. This can be submitted again should it be become a Good Article.
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
3 Bahadur
[edit]- ... that 3 Bahadur is the first Pakistani computer-animated feature film directed by an Oscar awarded Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy?
Created by Umais Bin Sajjad (talk). Self-nominated at 13:40, 17 April 2015 (UTC).
Article was created in December 2014. No recent major expansion and therefore not eligible for DYK. -Zanhe (talk) 17:18, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
- I don't get this rule. Why an article needs to be expanded/created "recently" to meet DYK criteria. Instead the reviewer should look at the importance of DYK article and the tagline. UBStalk 05:57, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm with you. The preoccupation with "new content" is utterly stupid -- just an arbitrary way to choose what goes on the main page without having to actually judge which articles/hooks are actually things people would want to see. EEng (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- Sure, let's get rid of that "utterly stupid" rule and make any article eligible for DYK, if you're ready to review a few hundred or thousand nominations a day. Feel free to propose the rule change on DYK talk. I'm not a stickler to rules and usually give new nominators a lot of leeway, but this nomination is about 5 months too late. -Zanhe (talk) 00:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- My proposal would be to substitute straight voting on hooks -- a simple popularity contest -- for the dumb 7 day rule. The hooks/articles could be of any age, but only those getting the top # of votes would pass to the next stage to be reviewed. This would, in fact, reduce the amount of reviewing, and the hooks/articles would be more interesting than they are now. EEng (talk) 00:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Sure, let's get rid of that "utterly stupid" rule and make any article eligible for DYK, if you're ready to review a few hundred or thousand nominations a day. Feel free to propose the rule change on DYK talk. I'm not a stickler to rules and usually give new nominators a lot of leeway, but this nomination is about 5 months too late. -Zanhe (talk) 00:22, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm with you. The preoccupation with "new content" is utterly stupid -- just an arbitrary way to choose what goes on the main page without having to actually judge which articles/hooks are actually things people would want to see. EEng (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- Please see WP:DYK#Eligibility criteria: an article must be created, expanded 5x, or have become a Good Article within the past seven days to be eligible for DYK. -Zanhe (talk) 07:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
