Template:Did you know nominations/Horses in the United States
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Horses in the United States
[edit]- ... that there are about 9.2 million horses in the United States and 4.6 million citizens are involved in the horse business?
Created by OccultZone (talk). Largely expanded by Montanabw (talk) Nominated at 16:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
- Additional checks included: every paragraph has inline citations, checks for copyvio reveals no problems. Of note is that this copyvio check shows an initial potential copyvio problem relative to the site, but the site appears very likely to have copied content from the Wikipedia article (as is noted in other content on the page). Content of the hook is backed in the article with inline citations to reliable sources. North America1000 04:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- I was just the writer of that hook and a total of 115 words. I will be back here in a few hours. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- You will see that I put in the merge/copy tags at the talk page to indicate per WP policy that I took a fair bit of material from the evolution and mustang articles. The wordpress site is definitely a mirror from the Evolution of the horse page (and its a creationism site anyway, so total nonsense to be a source here!) I also actually reworked quite a bit of the material after adding it, so it's not a simple copy and paste. The prior version before my edits and the moving in of material from other articles was way under the 1500 word limit and the citation was to a not-ideal site (Livescience can be good, but can also be tabloid-y and publishes breaking news as much as established science). All that said, I didn't do the DYK nom, but as I was the one who moved in a bunch of material and reworked it, I'm happy to keep working on it. Montanabw(talk) 04:40, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- I was just the writer of that hook and a total of 115 words. I will be back here in a few hours. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- To compare: Horses_in_the_United_States#Evolution brought in assorted sentences from Evolution_of_the_horse#Eohippus, Evolution_of_the_horse#Plesippus, and Evolution_of_the_horse#Equus. The second paragraph of that section was a substantial rewrite from the evolution article, as I went back to the original sources and restructured much of what was said.
- The second section Horses_in_the_United_States#Extinction_and_return brought in material from Evolution_of_the_horse#Return_to_the_Americas and Mustang#History. Again, I reworked several paragraphs and blended the material.
- Dup detector for the evolution article and the Mustang article] is probably better at spotting the identical material, which, after you weed out the citations and standard wikipedia headers/footers, etc., shows precisely what's been copied directly and what has been word strings that were worked into different sentences or restructured sentences. I feel that the copy tags at talk adequately address any material that remains closely paraphrased.
- So, I hope this explains what is going on. Montanabw(talk) 04:59, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- Additional checks included: every paragraph has inline citations, checks for copyvio reveals no problems. Of note is that this copyvio check shows an initial potential copyvio problem relative to the site, but the site appears very likely to have copied content from the Wikipedia article (as is noted in other content on the page). Content of the hook is backed in the article with inline citations to reliable sources. North America1000 04:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
New prose presently exceeds the 1,500 character minimum. North America1000 06:51, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Per the result from QPQ Check, OccultZone (creator of this nomination page) needs to perform a QPQ review before this can proceed. This is all that remains to be done. North America1000 17:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
- Reviewed many,[1][2][3][4][5][6] and probably more from last 6 days. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Good to go per all of the above. North America1000 17:34, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
