Template:Did you know nominations/Chicken Kiev speech
- 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: promoted by BlueMoonset (talk) 04:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
Chicken Kiev speech
[edit]... that United States President George Bush encouraged Ukranians not to leave the Soviet Union in a 1991 speech in Kiev, later dubbed the Chicken Kiev speech?
- Comment: New article - interesting topic
Created/expanded by Spoildead (talk). Nominated by Spoildead (talk) at 18:28, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe the hook should be more specific, I.e. "encouraged Ukranians not to leave the Soviet Union in a 1991 speech in Kiev, later dubbed the Chicken Kiev speech?" or something like that. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:44, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- thank you, I like that! I changed it from: "that United States President George Bush Sr. discouraged the break up of the Soviet Union?" to yours. Spoildead (talk) 20:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know if this effects the DYK nomination at all, but the page's creator has been blocked as a sock used to avoid scrutiny. A bunch of users worked on this page though, and it still seems like a good candidate for DYK regardless. Just not sure how DYK prefers to "give credit" in a case like this. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:39, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
I think this can still pass, notable subject and the like. As the sock master was blocked for copyright issues, this needs to be looked at thoroughly. BTW, Beeblebrox seems to deserve a credit. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:03, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Can I suggest a different hook? The current one isn't particularly interesting. How about:
ALT3 ... that the Chicken Kiev Speech was not about the popular chicken dish, nor about anyone's cowardice, but was U.S. President George Bush Sr.'s attempt to discourage Ukrainians from seeking independence?
- What do you think? Otherwise, OK. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 17:12, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- I strongly prefer the other hook, it is more direct in defining the article subject. If they want all the details they can click the link and read the article. However, enough time has passed that we should not assume readers know what the Soviet Union was, many of them were not even born when it broke up, we should probably link that as well. (member of the last generation taught cold-war paranoia in school, I feel so old...) Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- I agree: ALT3 is too talky and explanatory: I'm bored long before it's done saying what the speech wasn't. Still need a reviewer to examine the entire article and its original hook; I've struck ALT3. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
- I strongly prefer the other hook, it is more direct in defining the article subject. If they want all the details they can click the link and read the article. However, enough time has passed that we should not assume readers know what the Soviet Union was, many of them were not even born when it broke up, we should probably link that as well. (member of the last generation taught cold-war paranoia in school, I feel so old...) Beeblebrox (talk) 18:32, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- Just a thought, maybe a more concise hook (that also puts the target article up front) might be something like:
- ALT4: ... that in the Chicken Kiev speech, then-US President George Bush encouraged Ukraine to remain within the Soviet Union?
- or even something quirky like:
ALT5: ... that there was no chicken kiev in the Chicken Kiev speech?
- or something more pointed:
ALT6: ... that the Chicken Kiev speech "may have been the worst speech ever" by a US President?
- Any good? EdChem (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Article review: big enoug, new enough, cited enough, free of copyright infringement, and does not appear biased. Hook ALT4 is under consideration here: short and informative enough, alt6 counts only as a fringe opinion and alt5 is hardly telling us anything. Hook alt4 is covered in article, referenced and confirmed. good to go. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
