Template:Did you know nominations/Jessica Trengove

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 Orlady (talk) 17:48, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Jessica Trengove

(

)

... that 2012 Australian Olympic marathon runner Jessica Trengove won Sydney's 2011 City2Surf?

Reviewed: Wye Bridge Ward, Monmouth

Created/expanded by LauraHale (talk). Self nom at 02:33, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Good to go. Very impressed by the sheer quantity of these articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Ernst, if the article were trimmed and the results of those competitions done as a list (doing this as prose makes for an unhappy reading experience; note the repetitiveness of the sentences) it might not be long enough. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
OK, I just did that: trimmed verbosity, repetitiveness, and did text as lists. Why the results (besides the City2Surf thing) should be listed is not clear: they aren't very impressive, but OK. After all those edits, the article is less than 800 characters. Drmies (talk) 02:36, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say the quality of the articles were very impressive. I said the sheer number of articles and noms which she has contributed are very impressive. When you have a lot of articles to plough through, quality is usually reduced. She's doing well I think considering biographies of athletes are usually pretty mundane.. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:16, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Working on getting the length back up. Should be done in the next half hour. I've also fixed the size problems on Georgina Kenaghan. --LauraHale (talk) 02:50, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
And article is now long enough. --LauraHale (talk) 03:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure--but that she trains by running as far as she can, that her family is planning to attend the Games, that she has a brother, that expands the article but adds nothing of encyclopedic relevance. And this applies to a lot of the articles on the DYK page, I'm sorry to say. Drmies (talk) 03:12, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

* I would disagree as this is the sort of information that you would expect to find on an article about a runner. Their training is relevant. Family is also relevant. A lot of the information you put into prose is often found in prose format. I don't see anything wrong with the content. --LauraHale (talk) 03:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Of course you disagree. But that information shouldn't be done in prose: it's illegible, and I'm not the first one to utter that critique (it came up in the Twitter AfDs as well). That someone's family supports them is normally found in the article in the local paper, not in an encyclopedic article. Forgive me, but it seems to me that you're trying to get a hundred DYKs out of a highly formulaic scheme filled in with mundane, even trivial factoids. It lowers the value of the whole DYK thing. You keep saying things like "that's just your opinion" and "the DYK rules don't say we have to write quality"--but I disagree. Drmies (talk) 03:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

If this were the only Australian Olympic athlete nominated at DYK in the past month, I'd feel differently, but I see nothing about this article that makes me want to feature it in DYK. (It reminds me of Billy Hathorn's boring small-town politicians.) Not every article that meets the minimum DYK criteria deserves to be featured, IMO. (That's why I don't submit every minimally acceptable article that I write or expand.) --Orlady (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2012 (UTC)