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) 04:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
NOTE:This article is not quite ready for review yet. I will strike this post when the article is ready. Gatoclass (talk) 05:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC) * Struck as a result of discussion below. Gatoclass (talk) 10:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm done expanding the article, so please go ahead with the review. Socrates2008 (Talk) 10:11, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Well, you may be done with it, but I'm not :) There is quite a bit of info I intend to add to this before it goes to the mainpage, so again, please refrain from reviewing it for the time being. Gatoclass (talk) 10:51, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps you could elaborate - you haven't contributed to the article, yet have submitted the article for DYK with yourself as a co-creator, and without having the courtesy to inform me? Socrates2008 (Talk) 12:41, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Replied on your talk page. Gatoclass (talk) 15:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
Socrates2008 is the only author at the time of nomination. And as of this posting, Gatoclass has contributed nothing to editing of the article. You can't claim authorship based on intent. — Maile (talk) 11:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
I am not claiming authorship "based on intent". If I don't get around to expanding the article, I will remove myself from the credits. I have simply requested that the article be bypassed for review until I have had time to add my contribution. That hardly appears to me to be an unreasonable request, given that there are over 100 unreviewed articles on this page, some of which have sat here for two months. Gatoclass (talk) 18:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Doesn't sound like you've taken the feedback onboard. Running a shadow DYK without letting primary contributor(s) know is exceptionally bad form. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that this wasn't intentional - if it was, then you'll have a lot more to answer for. Adding yourself as an author above without having made a single edit to the article was hopefully an oversight too, as the alternative would be exceptionally selfish and disrespectful towards your WP peers.
Lastly, you don't have any "skin" in the game (yet), so very simply, you don't have a mandate right now to put the brakes on the review of this article; please could you strike your note from the top of this text. Thanks Socrates2008 (Talk) 06:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Now it's my turn to run out of patience. Quite frankly I can't recall anybody ever kicking up such a fuss over the fact that somebody nominated his article at DYK and failed to immediately inform him of the fact. But I certainly have no desire to continue bickering with someone over something as innocuous as a proposal to add some additional content to a new article - a proposal that I think most Wikipedians would view as a positive. Certainly, you've done more than enough at this point to discourage me from adding any additional content to this article, so I will be moving on to greener pastures. I just hope someone will still have enough interest in this nomination to at least give it the copyedit it so desperately needs before being displayed on the mainpage. Gatoclass (talk) 10:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Clearly you've missed the point, and I too have lost patience waiting for the elusive content addition that never came. Anyway, thanks for striking the note and good luck with the T.J Southall article you've spun off this one. Socrates2008 (Talk) 11:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks - ditto. Gatoclass (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Article is new enough and long enough and the hook is referenced. Image is in the public domain. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Article is new enough and long enough and the hook is referenced. Image is in the public domain. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
