Template:Did you know nominations/Big Motor
- 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 15:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Big Motor
- ... that as part of an insurance fraud scheme, Big Motor employees hit cars with socks stuffed with golf balls?
- Source: (Big Motor) revealed at least 1,275 cases of improper repairs...these involved using screwdrivers and sandpaper to scratch car bodies, hitting vehicles with golf balls put in socks and doing unnecessary paint work. Bigmotor chief to resign in wake of repair fraud scandal, The Japan Times
- ALT1: ... that Tokyo police raided Big Motor's headquarters as part of an investigation about tree killing? Source: 13 at Bigmotor Referred to Prosecutors over Roadside Trees, The Japan News - "Bigmotor officials told Jiji Press in September last year that the company cut down trees and sprayed herbicides...The Tokyo police raided Bigmotor’s headquarters and nine outlets in September last year over the dead trees."
- Reviewed:
Created by FossilDS (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
FossilDS (talk) 19:14, 3 November 2024 (UTC).
Interesting, copyvio free, long enough, recently created, reliable source. Both are passable but the first is far more interesting (and the second is cited into a different source in text).
- However, one issue. I am worried this article is slightly NPOV, in that it has almost no content except the controversies. While their scandals are a key part of the notability I have concerns with running on the front page an article that is only scandal when they do seem to have been otherwise notable, with little historical context or other information on their activities. For comparison, the Japanese article looks more balanced on this front. I don't think anything has to be removed, but maybe add more that isn't scandal? I have no issues otherwise. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- @PARAKANYAA:, thank you for the review! I do also agree that the article leans a bit too heavily on the controversies, but almost all Japanese-language sources and all English-languages sources basically only talk about the scandals, so it was a bit difficult finding stuff unrelated to it. I've reorganized the article a bit and added more info from the Japanese article, I hope it's at least somewhat sufficient. I'm also happy with nominating the first DYK instead of ALT1.FossilDS (talk) 16:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
The new changes address my issue. Good to go! PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- @PARAKANYAA:, thank you for the review! I do also agree that the article leans a bit too heavily on the controversies, but almost all Japanese-language sources and all English-languages sources basically only talk about the scandals, so it was a bit difficult finding stuff unrelated to it. I've reorganized the article a bit and added more info from the Japanese article, I hope it's at least somewhat sufficient. I'm also happy with nominating the first DYK instead of ALT1.FossilDS (talk) 16:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
