Template:Did you know nominations/J.W. Harris (bull rider)

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) 06:30, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

J.W. Harris (bull rider)

(

)

... that four-time Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association World Champion Bull Rider J.W. Harris suffered five concussions in 2008? Source: "After he received five concussions this season, he started wearing a helmet and believes he started becoming more successful."[1]

Comment: I have used 5 of 5 of my QPQ credits before I need to do a review.

Created by Dawnleelynn (talk). Self-nominated at 04:18, 17 January 2018 (UTC).

The hook is very catchy, but I have tagged the article for feature-writing and tone issues. I wrote my explanation on the talk page. Yoninah (talk) 01:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Hi, Cwmhiraeth, you have reviewed my DYKs before, so I'm asking you for help, please. I believe this editor has gone beyond WP:DYKNOT and other issues. They do not call out other editors they work on for the same issues. (Added note here-I just meant for story and tone issues only). Sorry. I'm making that clear now. And they no longer respond to my comments on the article talk page where they started a conversation. How can I complete the review when they no longer engage? dawnleelynn^(talk) 20:13, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dawnleelynn: I am sorry that you don't have the patience to wait for my reply. I've been pretty busy with regular work this week and have been too tired at night to respond to your lengthy posts with a clear head. If you don't want me to continue working on your nomination, please feel free to ask someone else. But please AGF instead of saying They do not call out other editors they work on for the same issues. Can you provide me with diffs for such a statement? I try to evaluate every article according to the DYK rulebook. I'm happy not to engage further with someone who is ABF. Yoninah (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I added four articles to the conversation in Harris' talk page that you worked on as shown in the edit history and your contribs that clearly show they have at least a partial form of telling a story. And one definitely has some puffery in it, Bloom. You are right, I should have been more specific. But seriously, there are more, but this is enough. Beyond that, I looked through many and did not see anyone else tagged either. Not to mention my last article, Eternal Sun, same issues and a long time working those out too. I mean, I got the lead editor who brought Secretariat to Featured Article Status to do a copy edit and you were still not satisfied. dawnleelynn^(talk) 23:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC) Sorry, I did not make this clear, they do not call out other editors for story and tone issues, this is important. Also, when cwmhiraeth did a review on my Code Blue (bull) article for DYK, it went fine without any tone or story issues. dawnleelynn^(talk) 23:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Add that I apologized profusely on Yoninah's talk page profusely for the mistake of making them think that I was calling out all their edits instead of just the tone & story telling ones as being the ones that I can't find any other editor's being tagged or edited in their articles for. dawnleelynn^(talk) 04:39, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

It's obvious from beginning to end that article creators who question edits, even when legitimately, are put off and ignored, so I'm pulling this DYK from the queue. dawnleelynn^(talk) 19:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dawnleelynn: It's a shame you put so much work into this and won't wait to see it on the main page (where thousands of other readers will see it, too). Frankly, I'm surprised you didn't act like a lot of other page creators around here and simply delete the tags. Yes, I was very insulted by your accusations and tone, but I'm over it now. My main concern is the article. My main issue with it is that you say he's only halfway through his career, yet you've written an overlong and detailed account of his life that is usually reserved for dead kings and film stars. Sections 2014 and 2015 practically cover every week. I suggest some serious cutting and synopsizing to get this article in shape. And also removal of the puffery. This is not a personal attack (I don't even know you), but an evaluation based solely on the article. I'm happy to continue so we can get this on the main page. Yoninah (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Yes, I did put a lot of work into it. There is some content I didn't add yet, but it was hardly essential, just the Championship Bull Riding competition and the YouTube/PBR videos of official PBR rides. But like I said on your talk page, I did not mean to accuse you of making all the edits on my article only and not on others' articles. That would be impossible. That was just a bad comment that was written in too much of a hurry. Also, with the beginning comments, tone is sometimes hard to get right with text only. So, I can't change it, but will try to do better in the future.

And, like I said before, my first draft is usually verbose and then I take editing runs through to make it more concise. I reminded myself of his birthdate just now, and he's 31, so that's really more like 2/3's of his career over now. Anyway, both the PBR and PRCA seasons run from January to November/December. In 2014, I documented 1-2 outs for about 15 dates. In 2015, I documented 5-6 dates, I didn't even get the Finals in that year because I couldn't find a source. If you look at the partner web site of the PBR and PRCA, ProBullStats [2] you'll see that Harris has made 604 qualified rides out of 1,160 attempts. That's over 1,000 times he's sat on the back of a bull and tried to make 8 seconds. It works out to almost 100 bulls per year. What is overly long is not how many attempts I've documented in a particular season, but how long the description is in some of them. BTW, we aren't supposed to take the template tags off until the issue is corrected. So I don't. I'm a stickler for the rules. I've seen editors take the tags off and more. Anyway, if you are still willing and want to let bygones-be-bygones for the sake of the article, then I will too. Thanks. I have another article I just added, though. Is it okay to have two? This article is short and doesn't have any story or tone issues, yes I'm sure. dawnleelynn^(talk) 22:24, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dawnleelynn: thank you for the extensive edits you made to the article over the past few days. That went a long way to solving the story and tone problems that I mentioned. I did a close read and also removed numerous quotes that I feel made it look like a magazine article rather than an encyclopedia article. Imaging opening up the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: would you expect to see quotes like this in a listing? That's what we're aiming for. If you're comfortable with my changes, I'll proceed with this review. Best, Yoninah (talk) 20:23, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: There are many admins who recommend a cautious limit on the use of non-free content, and I started editing in the beginning with a heavy hand using quotes. I admit I still need to prune more on a regular basis. Your edits were excellent and vital. I still wonder about the headings, which you brought up earlier. I see there being too many in the Career section, but none would be too few also. I could do three sections as this: PRCA, PRCA and PBR, and PBR. Or open to other ideas. But no rush either. I have the Championship Bull Riding experience to add to Career and the YouTube/PBR official videos to add to External links, but this could be delayed until after the DYK runs. Whatever you think is best I'll do on all these issues. I'm definitely trying to be more teachable and flexible as you are way more experienced. Thanks for the edits. I will only do copyedit type edits until we get through the DYK. Oh, yes, regarding article length, no one has really discussed this with me before, so I had no notion of what was appropriate. For example, look at Shepherd Hills Tested real quick. Tell me, is that article too long for a World Champion bull? He's not in a hall of fame or anything. What is the best tool to determine how long I should make articles based on notability? Sometimes it's easy, for Oscar I could barely find any sources, so even though he's into two halls of fame, it's very short. Right, and the article I just added to DYK on Guy Allen is very short, even though he's in seven halls of fame. I just wasn't that interested in it. dawnleelynn^(talk) 20:54, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dawnleelynn: Lots of questions! I'll answer one by one.

First, in regard to your previous post, there's no problem having more than one nomination at a time on the DYK page.
The subheads under Career look very logical to me. Film stars (a subject I'm more familiar with!) also have their careers broken into years or decades. You start out the section with a short synopsis of his career in each organization, which is very helpful.
Yes, Shepherd Hills Tested is way too long, IMO. But no one's nominating it for DYK or GA, so it will probably stay this way forever. A long time ago I heard 37,000 characters mentioned as an upper limit for articles. The idea is to be concise while including everything that makes the subject notable.
I'm ready to approve right now. Are you ready? Yoninah (talk) 21:07, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Okay, yes many questions, thanks for answering. Good to give a number for article length, I can use a tool to measure the length. Yes, plenty ready for approval, sounds great. Thanks so much for your time. dawnleelynn^(talk) 21:24, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Full review: New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. However, I am having trouble finding the cites for the two hook facts. In the first paragraph under 2013 season, you mention 4 titles, but footnote 9 only mentions 3 titles (that sentence, or the source, needs to be changed). In the first paragraph under 2008 season, footnote 2 doesn't mention anything about 5 concussions. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 21:36, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Should be finished now. Thanks a bunch. See you tomorrow then. dawnleelynn^(talk) 22:15, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. Everything looks good! Hook refs verified and cited inline. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits and review. In the future, I will strive to make the articles more encyclopedic before they get to DYK. And be better behaved and more teachable. I'm glad the article is so improved, mostly due to your efforts. dawnleelynn^(talk) 17:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

That's kind of you to say. Thank you. Yoninah (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2018 (UTC)