Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/A Christmas Carol

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Yoninah (talk) 09:44, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Ineligible per previous ITN appearance

DYK toolbox

A Christmas Carol

[edit]
(
)
Charles Dickens in 1842
Charles Dickens in 1842
  • ... that between 1849 and 1870 the author Charles Dickens gave public readings of his 1843 novella A Christmas Carol? Source: Billen, Andrew (2005). Charles Dickens: The Man Who Invented Christmas. London: Short Books. ISBN 978-1-904977-18-6, pp 8–10; Douglas-Fairhurst, Robert (2006). "Introduction". In Dickens, Charles. A Christmas Carol and other Christmas Books. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. xxviii. ISBN 978-0-19-920474-8.

Improved to Good Article status by The Bounder (talk). Self-nominated at 22:26, 11 May 2017 (UTC).

  • Date and length fine. However i do have a problem with the hook. There is so many rich grounds for a hook in this article about one of the most famous Dickens plays and this is the one chosen? I think we can do a bit better than this for a great literary text. Something about Scrooge or the 3 ghosts? IF @The Bounder: disagrees, I'll be happy to pass it as QPQ done and no close paraphrasing with the picture licence fine. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you The C of E. I did think about a few alternatives, but most people are aware of most of the story and characters, and anything more "interesting" moves too far into third party opinions. This aspect of the public readings is giving factual information that most people are unaware of, and is an interesting enough point in its own right. All the best, The Bounder (talk) 11:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • @The Bounder: I understand your reasoning, but I agree with The C of E here. A "factual" hook does not give the reader any incentive to click on the article, since he's got all the facts in front of him. A clever/emotional/surprising hook, on the other hand, makes him want to click on it! Yoninah (talk) 00:08, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I have given my explanation and my thoughts and I would prefer that this hook be the one that goes through. Its interest lies in it being an aspect few people had have any idea. Because of that, it is surprising to many. – The Bounder (talk) 05:38, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Well then, I'll restore the tick, but I won't be the one to promote it. Yoninah (talk) 13:31, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Returning from prep for further discussion of hook. A short discussion has been going on here. Yoninah (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
  • (copying my comments across from there) That Dickens gave public readings of his work is not news to anyone, really - Simon Callow has been recreating them for years. If you want interesting hooks about A Christmas Carol, how about:
ALT 1 ... that Dickens developed A Christmas Carol in his head while taking night-time walks of 15 to 20 miles around London?
ALT 2 ... that the character of Ebenezer Scrooge in A Christmas Carol has been considered to have been based on Dickens's fears about himself?
ALT 3 ... that all 6,000 copies of the first edition of A Christmas Carol were sold within five days?
ALT 4 ... that within two months of the publication of A Christmas Carol, there were eight rival theatrical productions of it in London?
ALT 5 ... that it was A Christmas Carol that popularised the phrase "Merry Christmas" among the Victorian public?

And I haven't even got to the end of the article. The nominator's hook is the dullest possible hook and the image is (literally) dull and unappealing at main page size. BencherliteTalk 18:09, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Quite frankly, I am asking myself why this nomination shouldn't be held for Christmas? It's not as if we had a huge number of great Christmas hooks over the last couple of years. Gatoclass (talk) 18:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Please withdraw this nomination. – The Bounder (talk) 23:16, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
      • No don't do that, it's a good article for DYK and we could do an IAR hold for Christmas. I know what it is like to have hooks that I really really wanted and fought for be rejected by the community against my wishes. (Template:Did you know nominations/United States v. One Tyrannosaurus Bataar Skeleton and Template:Did you know nominations/The Winker's Song (Misprint)) Don't let it get you down, you have done a good job and lots of people would be delighted to see an iconic piece of literature on the front page. Sometimes you do have to give the people what they want in order to make something better. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
        • I would rather it was withdrawn. – The Bounder (talk) 13:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
      • (edit conflict) I am certainly not saying that this shouldn't be on the main page - I'm only saying that it should be on the main page with as interesting a hook as possible to entice as many readers as possible to the article. I saw and commented upon the article, gosh, nearly 9 years ago when it was nominated for GA status, and it was nowhere near its current quality then, so well done. BencherliteTalk 13:10, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
        • I would rather it was withdrawn. – The Bounder (talk) 13:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
          • Why do you want it withdrawn? The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 14:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
            • The Bounder is presumably upset that his wishes are not respected. This seems mainly to be a matter of taste and de gustibus non est disputandum. The reviewing guide advises that "if the participants cannot agree on at least one viable hook, the discussion will eventually be closed by an uninvolved editor and the article will not be promoted". We should not force through an ALT without the nominator's agreement. My own opinion is that the original hook is not exciting but it is not hopeless either and I would expect it to get an adequate number of click-throughs. Andrew D. (talk) 10:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
            • Fine with me. We can promote it without the image. It probably will get a few hundred clicks, but it would get thousands in a featured spot in the Christmas queue. Yoninah (talk) 13:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
              • Judging from the last two years, the article gets about 500K views each Christmas season which is about 100 times the average DYK. The effect of putting it up at DYK would therefore be marginal; it's a sufficiently popular and vital topic that it doesn't need a clever hook to get read. If it doesn't get run then the slot will probably go to a topic that could use the exposure more. Andrew D. (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
                • Personally I think we should continue with this as we do have the precedent of not necessarily following what the nominator wishes if it means a good candidate article can be featured on DYK. After all, I specifically requested Template:Did you know nominations/Flag of the United States of the Ionian Islands on on April Fools Day and someone overrode it without my knowledge or consent and it ran on the 4th of July. Plus it does say that all Wikipedia contributions are released freely to be edited and used in any way so we can keep this going. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 11:22, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I would rather it was withdrawn. The page will likely appear on the main page in the OTD section at Christmas, having done so 10 times over the last 13 years. Andrew Davidson has already pointed out the guidelines on what happens if there is a dispute on a hook, which is to withdraw. The basis for using IAR is to have the hook run on a day it will run in ITN anyway, or one person saying 'my wishes were ignored, so I don't care about crapping on other people'. It's time to follow the DYK guidelines and pull this. - The Bounder (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

That settles it. As the topic has been repeatedly run in OTD (e.g on 17 Dec 2004), then it is not eligible for DYK per 1e, "Articles that have featured (bold link) previously ... in a blurb on the main page's ... On this day ...are ineligible." Thanks to The Bounder for suggesting it and for his work of improving the article. As noted, the page will continue to be read in large numbers regardless and so this work has not been wasted. Andrew D. (talk) 09:33, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/A_Christmas_Carol&oldid=943999368"