Template:Did you know nominations/Ingrid Chua-Go

The following is an archived discussion of Ingrid Chua-Go's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:07, 16 March 2013 (UTC).

Ingrid Chua-Go

(

)

... that Filipino fashion and society blogger Ingrid Chua-Go's (pictured) fascination with writing was sparked by a toy typewriter her mother gave her as a child?

Reviewed: Grace Riñoza-Plazo
Comment: Article created in User:Kim Guevarra userspace on Jan 3, moved to my userspace on Jan 26. Moved to mainspace on Feb 21.

Created/expanded by I'm Tony Ahn (talk). Self nominated at 05:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC).

The first criteria is that an article has been created or substantially expanded in the last five days.
The article doesn't fit the very first criteria!

It is new but not new enough!

The article was created on January 26.

It was then slowly expanded over a period of three weeks.

It the sat for another 13 days before it was nominated.

It needed to be nominated in early February to qualify as a "newly created or expanded article".

Other than that, it appears to meet all the criteria, being well written. concise, interesting and properly referenced.
One issue is that there are two redirects to other websites within the text. These need to be formatted as proper references.
You can also make a section at the bottom of the article with the heading External links.

Unfortunately, I think that the time factor rules this article out as a DYK! Amandajm (talk) 11:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I believe you're misinterpreting the criteria. As far as I'm concerned, the time criteria for DYK is, for this article, creation within five days in mainspace. The article was moved to mainspace by me on February 21, and was nominated the next day. How is the article not new enough? --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 12:23, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Article was clearly moved to mainspace on February 21, which is considered the day it was begun for DYK purposes. As it was self-nominated the day after, it clearly qualifies as new for DYK. A new review is clearly needed, as it is indeed a "newly created" article under DYK rules. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't comprehend this "mainspace" thing. Please explain. When I look at the history of the article, it seems perfectly clear that the greater part of the work was done weeks before it was nominated. Where was it moved from? Are you telling me that it wasn't visible until February 21, regardless of when it was created? Amandajm (talk) 00:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

"Mainspace" is where all the articles live. "Userspace" are a user's regular page and talk page, and any subpages. Many people start developing articles in userspace subpages, sometimes called sandboxes, where they work to perfect them. When they're ready, they use the Wikipedia Move function to move the article from their userspace work area to mainspace (also called "article space").

The DYK rule that covers this is WP:DYKSG#D8: ' "Five days old" means five days old in article space. You may write your article on a user subpage and perfect it for months. The five days start when you move it into article space.' When you look for a move in an article's history, it helps to have a date: I'm Tony Ahn helpfully gave the February 21 date, and if you look in article history on that date, you can see that one of the two edits on that date has the following edit summary: "Sky Harbor moved page User:I'm Tony Ahn/Ingrid Chua-Go to Ingrid Chua-Go without leaving a redirect: Reviewed per "offline" WP:AFC." In this case, the user page "User:I'm Tony Ahn/Ingrid Chua-Go", which was a subpage of I'm Tony Ahn's user page, and thus in user space (you can tell by the initial "User:" prefix for the page) into mainspace or article space under the article name "Ingrid Chua-Go". So February 21 is when it moved from user space to article space, and when DYK's five day countdown started. As it was nominated that same day, it qualifies.

The history covers the article from its moment of creation in userspace to the current day. So all the edits up until the move to article space, and the edits after it moved and became visible in article space, are all in one edit history. You have to look closely to see the move to article space—because it's a move, there's a 0 character change. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

To answer your specific question, there was no Ingrid Chua-Go article under that name until February 21. Before that, it was stored in userspace: it existed, but it the page wouldn't have come up as an article if you'd entered the name in the Search box, because it didn't exist yet in article space. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation.
The only little problem is the inline links to non-wiki pages. They are in the introduction and direct to two magazines. The references need to be formatted so that the external link appears in the references, not within the text of the article. (See comment above) Can someone sort that out please, so I can give this a tick? Amandajm (talk) 06:09, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. I'm Tony Ahn (talk) 07:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Still one small problem that I didn't notice previously. As it is the biography of a living person, the BLP template needs to be placed at the top of the talk page. That is BLP in double squiggly brackets. Amandajm (talk) 12:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I added the functional equivalent of {{BLP}} to the talk page, as well as Category:Living people to the article. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Ready to go. Amandajm (talk) 01:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)