Template:Did you know nominations/Consulate General of the United States, Hyderabad
Appearance
- 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 10:00, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues
DYK toolbox |
---|
Consulate General of the United States, Hyderabad
[edit]... that the Consulate General of the United States in Hyderabad was the United States government's first new consulate general anywhere in the world since 1985 and India's first since independence in 1947?
5x expanded by Mspraveen (talk). Self nominated at 06:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC).
-
- Regrettably, this is not ready to go; there is significant close paraphrasing in the article. Compare, for example, the article's "US$7.6 million was earmarked in the United States Government’s budget for renovation and modernization of Paigah Palace" to "US $ 7.6 million (about Rs. 30 crore) has been earmarked in the US Government’s budget for renovation and modernisation of Paigah Palace" from this source. I'm also wondering what else wasn't checked, since the review failed to enumerate what was. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Close paraphrasing still exists, so that needs to be fixed. Nominator of the article has not made any contributions to Wikipedia for a month, so we might have to wait on that. 5x expansion confirmed, article also is long enough. Hook is sourced with an inline citation after the sentence and is confirmed by the source. However, the hook is almost a direct copy of the source. The hook is also around the 200 character limit, while at the same time it does not mention that the Consulate General was openened in 2008. And that year should be added to the hook, otherwise it's unimpressive as this Consulate General could also have been opened in 1986 (while using the same hook). I fixed the current hook by adding the word "the" before U.S. govt. I have posted a message on the nominator's talk page to alert him of the current issues. Crispulop (talk) 11:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
- Note: striking original hook, which is now overlong at 202 characters, in addition to the more serious close paraphrasing issue. A new ALT hook is in order. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
- Close paraphrasing still exists, so that needs to be fixed. Nominator of the article has not made any contributions to Wikipedia for a month, so we might have to wait on that. 5x expansion confirmed, article also is long enough. Hook is sourced with an inline citation after the sentence and is confirmed by the source. However, the hook is almost a direct copy of the source. The hook is also around the 200 character limit, while at the same time it does not mention that the Consulate General was openened in 2008. And that year should be added to the hook, otherwise it's unimpressive as this Consulate General could also have been opened in 1986 (while using the same hook). I fixed the current hook by adding the word "the" before U.S. govt. I have posted a message on the nominator's talk page to alert him of the current issues. Crispulop (talk) 11:19, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
- Nominator has not edited on Wikipedia since the day this was nominated (September 20), so I see no hope of this passing: the hook has been struck, and the close paraphrasing remains. Closing nomination as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:29, 27 October 2013 (UTC)