Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Houkje Gerrits Bouma

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Yoninah (talk) 19:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Houkje Gerrits Bouma

(
)
Bouma (right) skating with ‘obscene’ bare arms
Bouma (right) skating with ‘obscene’ bare arms
  • ... that after Houkje Gerrits Bouma won one of the earliest women's speed skating competitions in 1809, women's speed races were not held because skating with bare arms was seen as obscene?
  • ALT1: ... that after Houkje Gerrits Bouma won one of the earliest women's speed skating competitions in 1809, women's competitions were not held anymore because skating with bare arms was seen as obscene? Source: https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/SK-A-5020 “ Baur schilderde de finalisten met hun blote armen, een afgeworpen mantel op het ijs. De weinig verhullende kleding zorgde voor veel ophef en daarom was het voorlopig de laatste vrouwenwedstrijd.“ (in Dutch)

Created and moved from Draft space to main space by SportsOlympic (talk). Self-nominated at 17:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC).

  • The article is new enough and long enough at 1,801 characters by my count. I'll AGF on the hook reference since I can't read Dutch-language sources, but a few problems prevent me from being able to approve the page for DYK at the moment. First, the article doesn't really support the hook fact. It says the bare arms "caused a commotion", but that just means it received attention. This doesn't back the claim that the act was thought to be obscene. Second, the last sentence is unsourced; a reference should be added to cover this part. Third, two of the four references include unreliable links. Ref 3 includes a Facebook summary, which as a Facebook page is not a reliable source. Print books are reliable sources, so I see no need to even include that link. Ref 4 is to WikiTree, which isn't reliable because it is user-edited like Wikipedia. The sourcing will have to be improved before this gets a check mark. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:15, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
    • CommentThanks! All have been solved. SportsOlympic (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
      • Thanks for fixing those issues, but before this gets a tick mark, the reference formatting should probably be cleaned up. None of the web links has an access date, and the book in ref 4 needs a page number for verifiability. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • The hook is also rather repetitively worded. Posting a reminder on the nominator's talk page to return to this ASAP. Yoninah (talk) 20:14, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @SportsOlympic: Please see how I have restored the original thread and marked your revised hook as ALT1. It is not recommended to write over hooks on the template since then it is impossible for other editors and promoters to follow the discussion. Yoninah (talk) 00:58, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Well, now you're writing a complete sentence, not a hook. There must be some way to cut this in half so it is "hooky", not informational. Yoninah (talk) 01:00, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Why wasn’t that mentioned as a first point, as that is important? But no problem is the hook will be changed. SportsOlympic (talk) 21:26, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
  • The nominator has not returned to this nomination since his last post almost 2 weeks ago. If nothing is done about the article issues or the hook length, this will be closed as unsuccessful by the end of this week. Yoninah (talk) 12:54, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm not the nominator but I would hate to see such a creative article/hook idea go to waste (especially since there is a pic to go with it), which is why I have devised some revised "hooky" hooks which I would propose:

@Yoninah: Would you consider one of these to be better? If not, I might come up with a few more :) Also pinging @SportsOlympic one last time because they seem to be still around and might have forgotten about this here.--LordPeterII (talk) 12:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Ahh, thanks for the hooks. I would go for ALT3. SportsOlympic (talk) 18:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I like ALT1 best (ALT2 to 4 are too hooky). It looks to me that nearly all requirements are met, but there are 2 inline citation and 2 clarifications still needed. @SportsOlympic: if you resolve this, I can pass this DYK. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@P199:, I fixed the references issues (and expanded the article a bit). SportsOlympic (talk) 20:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: As native Dutch speaker, I have verified the online Dutch-language sources. P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:30, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

  • @P199: thank you for the review, but are you aware that one of the criteria for the hook is that it be "hooky"? Not a full sentence, like ALT1, but an interesting angle or turn of phrase that will make readers want to click on the article to read more. Also, if the nominator wants an image slot, it has to be very hooky. ALT2-3-4 are hooky. Please let us know if any or all of these meet the DYK criteria (i.e. appear in the article with an inline cite, etc.). Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • FWIW, I think ALT1 is interesting enough. "Hooky" shouldn't mean gimmicky, which ALT2 and ALT4 are (almost suitable for April 1 DYK). And ALT3 is misleading, because no reference states that their outfit was provocative. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 21:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @P199: I hear you. But ALT1 tells you everything there is to know; there's no reason to click on the article. It really must be shorter. ALT2 is inacccurate; she had bare arms, not bare hands, so I struck that. I struck ALT3 per your remark. ALT4 isn't bad. Wouldn't you click on the article to learn more about what "bare arms" means? Yoninah (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

for ALT4. I don't want to hold up this DYK for semantics. But it should be said that a cornerstone of DYK is that hooks are factual, based on RS. So they can't stray too far from the cited facts for the sake of being "hooky". -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 00:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Houkje_Gerrits_Bouma&oldid=994236936"