Template:Did you know nominations/Half-Blood Blues
- 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 Allen3 talk 16:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Half-blood blues
[edit]- ...
that Half-Blood Blues didn't have a Canadian publisher until summer of 2011 yet by years end the title won the highly prestigious Scotiabank Giller Prize?
- Reviewed: "Half of Me"
Created/expanded by My76Strat (talk). Self nom at 06:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Can I suggest a differently worded hook?
- ... ALT1
that Half-Blood Blues, by Candian writer Esi Edugyan, didn't have a Canadian publisher until summer of 2011 yet it still won the highly prestigious Canadian Scotiabank Giller Prize in that year?
- ... ALT1
- What do you think? ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 16:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
There are basic inaccuracies in both the hook and the article, though these shouldn't be too hard to fix. First, the book had a Canadian publisher, only said publisher (Key Porter Books) suspended operations in early January 2011 (the book was due out in February 2011) and its parent company H.B. Fenn filed for bankruptcy in early February, so Edugyan had to find a new publisher. According to this article, UK publication was in June 2011, not April as it says in the nominated article, and Canadian was August 2011, but US release doesn't appear to have been until the end of February 2012 (amazon.com says February 28, 2012). So the article needs correcting and the hook as well; in addition, three uses of "Canadian" in the hook is simply too many. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- I acknowledge the valid contentions raised by BlueMoonset above. The sources conflict one another regarding publishing dates so I am inclined to rework the content with that in mind. This reference states: "Thomas Allen Publishers, which released the book this summer, months after it had appeared in the U.K. (with the venerable literary press Serpent’s Tail) and the U.S. (Picador)." This source also states: "A novel that, less than a year ago, was without a Canadian publisher has won the country’s most prestigious literary ... ", which spawned the core of the hook. I'll be focused on correcting these discrepancies, thanks for a diligent review and for bringing them to light. --My76Strat (talk) 06:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- The only irreconcilable conflict I see is in the US publication date, which is before Canada in the one quote, and after in the other. All others seems to avoid contradiction: "this summer" vs. "August 2011" for the Canadian date, "months after" UK (if UK was June 2011, then it's two months, but still "months") and "less than a year ago" also works: it had a Canadian publisher until January or February 2011, then was without a publisher when Key Porter and Fenn went down the tubes, and was then published in August 2011 in Canada. It's just the US/Picador discrepancy, and that's pretty well established as 2012 from other sources, which you can find and add if you need the extra weight. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- We have reached substantially the same conclusion. I found information regarding the April release, which is sourced to Goodreads; it appears all references to April reviews relate to the advance release copies. I ran across a couple other sources that make that clear whereas Goodreads only says that it was that publication which was reviewed. Before I start copy-editing the prose to align with the sources, and the hook, tell me if the ARC publication date is acceptable when saying: "first published on ... ". Otherwise the June date would be correct, and used. --My76Strat (talk) 01:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- ARCs—Advanced Reader Copies—are not acceptable, as they're pre-publication proofs sent out for reviews and the like, and are frequently not the exact book that is published: the book can be going through a final correction phrase at that point to fix typos and sometimes more than that. The official publication date is what matters—when the book is released for sale—so June is what you want. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
I corrected the article's prose to remain consistent with wp:rs and our discussion here. The hook needed modification to remain accurate as well and I present ATL2 below:
ALT2 ... that Half-Blood Blues, by Esi Edugyan, wasn't published in Canadian until August 2011, six months later than scheduled, yet it won the highly prestigious Scotiabank Giller Prizein that year? --My76Strat (talk) 00:44, 3 January 2013 (UTC)- I'd like to suggest a couple of slightly different hooks, that add mention of the change in publisher, move words around a bit, and omit the WP:PEACOCK phrase "highly prestigious"; the second mentions the bankruptcy:
- ALT3 ... that Half-Blood Blues by Esi Edugyan wasn't released in Canada until August 2011, six months behind schedule and from a different publisher, yet it won that year's Scotiabank Giller Prize?
*ALT4 ... that Half-Blood Blues by Esi Edugyan wasn't released in Canada until August 2011, six months behind schedule due to its first publisher's bankruptcy, yet it won that year's Scotiabank Giller Prize?- ALT3 is 188 characters and ALT4 is 197 characters, as compared to ALT2's 191 characters. Do you like either of these? BlueMoonset (talk) 04:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- I like ALT3 because it entices the reader to review the article to see why an alternate publisher was used opposed to ALT4 which kind of answers the curious notion. All in all, ALT3 does the best at generating curiosity of all hooks considered so far, IMO. --My76Strat (talk) 05:54, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- ARCs—Advanced Reader Copies—are not acceptable, as they're pre-publication proofs sent out for reviews and the like, and are frequently not the exact book that is published: the book can be going through a final correction phrase at that point to fix typos and sometimes more than that. The official publication date is what matters—when the book is released for sale—so June is what you want. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- We have reached substantially the same conclusion. I found information regarding the April release, which is sourced to Goodreads; it appears all references to April reviews relate to the advance release copies. I ran across a couple other sources that make that clear whereas Goodreads only says that it was that publication which was reviewed. Before I start copy-editing the prose to align with the sources, and the hook, tell me if the ARC publication date is acceptable when saying: "first published on ... ". Otherwise the June date would be correct, and used. --My76Strat (talk) 01:39, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- The only irreconcilable conflict I see is in the US publication date, which is before Canada in the one quote, and after in the other. All others seems to avoid contradiction: "this summer" vs. "August 2011" for the Canadian date, "months after" UK (if UK was June 2011, then it's two months, but still "months") and "less than a year ago" also works: it had a Canadian publisher until January or February 2011, then was without a publisher when Key Porter and Fenn went down the tubes, and was then published in August 2011 in Canada. It's just the US/Picador discrepancy, and that's pretty well established as 2012 from other sources, which you can find and add if you need the extra weight. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:41, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- I acknowledge the valid contentions raised by BlueMoonset above. The sources conflict one another regarding publishing dates so I am inclined to rework the content with that in mind. This reference states: "Thomas Allen Publishers, which released the book this summer, months after it had appeared in the U.K. (with the venerable literary press Serpent’s Tail) and the U.S. (Picador)." This source also states: "A novel that, less than a year ago, was without a Canadian publisher has won the country’s most prestigious literary ... ", which spawned the core of the hook. I'll be focused on correcting these discrepancies, thanks for a diligent review and for bringing them to light. --My76Strat (talk) 06:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Need a reviewer to check the recent ALTs. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:24, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
The National Post article is the source for the date of publishing, so I've repeated that after the sentence containing the basis for this DYK. With everything else already checked, this is good to go. I prefer ALT3 also, so I've struck through the rest. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 15:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
