Template:Did you know nominations/Charles Henry Herbert Cook
- 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 16:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Nominator requests nomination be withwrawn
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Charles Henry Herbert Cook
[edit]- ... that Charles Cook was a foundation staff member of the University of Canterbury?
2x expanded and sourced (BLP) by Stuartyeates (talk). Self nominated at 23:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC).
Stuartyeates, the article is not a biography of living person. And that's why a 5x expansion would be needed. Also, it wasn't unreferenced in it's first version of 07:35, 8 February 2012. The expansion started on 11th and you can still do it till 16th. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)- My bad! It is 5x already. Will review the article now. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Okay! The hooks checks, no copyvios, all good to go when one bare url in references is fixed. On a side note, aren't there way too many red links in it? Although they are legit, not sure if there is anything wrong in main page display of such article. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- (a) Sorry for the BLP thing. That was my mistake filling out the DYK nom, it's been a while since I thought about DYK. (b) About the WP:red links: yes there are a lot, I'm continuing to look for award winners and I expect that as I go further back more will have articles (or have the sources available to have articles written), this is a potential worklist. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- (c) WP:Bare_links fixed. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:37, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- So do you still want to work on the article to expand the list? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 20:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Not at this time. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- So do you still want to work on the article to expand the list? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 20:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Okay! The hooks checks, no copyvios, all good to go when one bare url in references is fixed. On a side note, aren't there way too many red links in it? Although they are legit, not sure if there is anything wrong in main page display of such article. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:01, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Good to go then. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
The article is 1,131 characters. SL93 (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- Explanation of the above: despite being a 5x expansion, the article does not meet the minimum size for a DYK article: DYKcheck gives the number of prose characters as 1131, far short of the minimum 1500 required. In addition, the article is a stub, and DYK does not accept articles unless they are beyond the stub stage. The article will need significant expansion to the point that it is longer than 1500 prose characters and no longer stub-like. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- Now at '1516 characters (242 words) "readable prose size"' Stuartyeates (talk) 04:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- Oh! How did i miss that. Will be careful next time. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 04:40, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- Now at 'Prose size (text only): 1543 characters (246 words) "readable prose size"' plus some stuff that doesn't count. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:59, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
- Article still has at least one bare url, which is not allowed for DYK articles. Also, the stub template will need to be removed before this can be approved. Once these are done, we can have a new review that encompasses the added material. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
- I believe both of those are now done. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:12, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- Article still has at least one bare url, which is not allowed for DYK articles. Also, the stub template will need to be removed before this can be approved. Once these are done, we can have a new review that encompasses the added material. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Stub template removed and bare url not bare any longer; this article needs a full DYK review. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Suggested hook is backed by a citation, but the reference doesn't contain the crucial info (founding staff member). Perhaps the reference got changed by accident in the improving of the article? The hook also isn't particularly interesting. I would suggest
- ALT1: that Charles Cook was studying to be a lawyer when was selected to be the first head of mathematics at University of Canterbury?
- Naturally this hook has the same reference issue since it is partially the same material. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- ALT1 looks good to me, thanks. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:01, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
- Stuartyeates, if nothing is done about the referencing issue noted by ThaddeusB, then ALT1 cannot be approved. Are you planning to address this soon? BlueMoonset (talk) 19:50, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Withdraw. I think this has dragged on to the point where this is no longer 'new' Stuartyeates (talk) 21:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
