Template:Did you know nominations/Attentional Control

The following discussion 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 Allen3 ^talk 17:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
Insufficient expansion

Attentional control

(

)

... that different parts of your brain work together to control your focus of attention?

Reviewed: Hallucination

Created/expanded by Sasenick412, reva m18, sbenduha (talk). Nominated by Sasenick412 (talk) at 17:09, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

This is not a full review, but some points that mean the nominator needs help to get this one off the ground for DYK This is an expansion of an old article, so it needs to be 5X expande

1) Nominator needs help formatting the nomination template

2) Nominator needs help formatting the hook and making sure it's referenced in the article

3) QPQ "Reviewed" - no such article as "Hallucination" currently on the DYK nominations page - but it appears that the nominator may have been talking about a non-DYK review, as they posted here: Talk:Hallucination#Critique_from_Sasenick412

(Note: New editor, QPQ review not really required)

4) Article created by Samwass on October 16, 2011

5) September 3, 2012 size before expansion was 3,935 characters

6) To qualify for 5X expansion, readable prose needs to be 19,657 characters

7) Multiple editors began expanding on October 23 and current size is 8,067 readable characters

8) First three references listed are not correctly formatted and point to nothing specific in the article

— Maile (talk) 21:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

It has been over three weeks since the above initial survey, and the article is currently 7,858 characters, fewer than on October 30. As the goal is 19,657 to meet DYK's fivefold expansion requirement, it seems clear that the article will not be eligible. I hope the authors try again in the future with another article, hopefully one that's new or that is smaller to begin with, so they are able to satisfy the size requirements. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)