Template:Did you know nominations/Goodbye in the Mirror
- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:08, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Goodbye in the Mirror
[edit]- ... that Shirley Clarke called Goodbye in the Mirror the first "real woman's film"?
Created by Rosekelleher (talk). Self nominated at 01:51, 17 November 2014 (UTC).
The character count is around 1389 characters – this includes the lead; the last, cited paragraph under Summary, the paragraph under Release, and the first paragraph under Reception. Subheads, lists (such as the cast list) and that long, run-on quote do not count. The article is overweighted toward summary and reception, and hardly anything is said about production notes; perhaps you could do an expansion there. The page needs to be over 1500 characters to qualify for DYK. Best, Yoninah (talk) 23:16, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
- That's odd, when I run the DYK check script I'm seeing this result: Prose size (text only): 2505 characters (433 words) "readable prose size" --Rosekelleher (talk) 00:41, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- p.s. Are you discounting the plot summary, for some reason? It's not a quote, I paraphrased it. --Rosekelleher (talk) 00:48, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, I didn't count the bulk of the Summary. We usually don't count that since it's usually not sourced. Yoninah (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
-
- Not sure I understand. The plot summary is prose. Also, the first paragraph of the summary has the same source as the second paragraph so I didn't put a duplicate citation after it, but I can if that's expected. As for the Clarke quote, I could shorten it, though I think all of it is relevant, and the only copy of the source article online is a hard-to-read scanned image, so readers who want more context can't just click on the link and easily find the passage they're looking for. I will try to find more information about the film's production, but I may not be successful. This isn't a Hollywood movie, it's an independent film made 50 years ago. And finally, I know you didn't say anything about the hook, but just for the record I think it's very interesting that a noted woman filmmaker called this movie the first "real woman's film." --Rosekelleher (talk) 01:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- OK, if you cite every paragraph under Summary, I guess we can add it to the character count and the article length will be OK. You don't need to shorten the Clarke quote. Hook ref verified and cited inline. No QPQ necessary for page creator with less than 5 DYKs. Yoninah (talk) 01:51, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Done. (The citations, that is. I am still trying to get access to a couple of articles published in 1962 that may provide more info about the film's production, but that may not pan out.) --Rosekelleher (talk) 15:23, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
