Template:Did you know nominations/Kamikaze Hearts (film)
- 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 Cielquiparle (talk) 15:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Kamikaze Hearts (film)
- ... that although it was rejected by the lesbian mainstream when it was first released, Kamikaze Hearts has since been called "a milestone in queer cinema"? Source: https://www.anothermag.com/design-living/14333/things-to-watch-bfi-london-film-festival-2022
- Reviewed: 5th nom
- Comment: I had fun writing this article.
Moved to mainspace by HelenDegenerate (talk). Self-nominated at 23:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC).
This is new enough, long enough, and neutrally and informatively written. The hook is fine for length and neutrality and is appropriately interesting, but the source says "rejected by the lesbian mainstream" which I think is an important difference from "the mainstream" so I'd like the hook to reflect that. QPQ not necessary. Text from sources is quoted appropriately - no copyright concerns.
- My one concern is that I'm not sure whether the Cultural Gutter counts as an RS. It's used in some articles, but only a few. It has bylines and "editors" but seems to be self-published by a group of people like a community blog. I couldn't find prior discussion at WP:RSN. If we can rely on this source, great; it has lots of useful info. But maybe we can't: I'd be interested in the author's thoughts. MartinPoulter (talk) 14:20, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback, MartinPoulter! Regarding lesbian mainstream vs the mainstream, I agree that it would probably be better to make that distinction, so I’ve modified the hook accordingly. I too am on the fence about the reliability of TCG. When I was researching for this article, I came across that site, but was sceptical— as you stated, it appears blog-y— and decided not to add it. The source seems to be used solely for ‘critic x said statement y’, so I’ll try to find some other sources for those. I will also start an RSN discussion for TCG just to confirm (or overturn) our suspicions. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 21:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § The Cultural Gutter ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 21:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've just finished replacing TCG with other references. Let me know what you think: Special:Diff/1127114576, Special:Diff/1127272058 ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 22:54, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
Excellent work. Sourcing issues resolved, this is ready for DYK. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:18, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've just finished replacing TCG with other references. Let me know what you think: Special:Diff/1127114576, Special:Diff/1127272058 ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 22:54, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback, MartinPoulter! Regarding lesbian mainstream vs the mainstream, I agree that it would probably be better to make that distinction, so I’ve modified the hook accordingly. I too am on the fence about the reliability of TCG. When I was researching for this article, I came across that site, but was sceptical— as you stated, it appears blog-y— and decided not to add it. The source seems to be used solely for ‘critic x said statement y’, so I’ll try to find some other sources for those. I will also start an RSN discussion for TCG just to confirm (or overturn) our suspicions. ◇HelenDegenerate◆ 21:09, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
