Template:Did you know nominations/Manila local elections, 2013

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 BlueMoonset (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Manila local elections, 2013

(

)

... that the 2013 Manila mayoral election includes police officer Dirty Harry, gang leader Asiong Salonga, a fortune teller, a driver, and an engineer?

Created/expanded by Julelovesjang (talk), Howard the Duck (talk). Nominated by Howard the Duck (talk) at 10:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Although the hook promises DYK gold, the article is only about double its previous length and does not include or source some of the major claims made in the hook. groupuscule (talk) 02:07, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I guess I typed too soon... with a rapid expansion from Howard the Duck it seems as though the article is now close to ready. I also didn't quite grok what was going on with "Dirty Harry" and "Asiong Salonga".

Is it reasonable to refer to a candidate's acting role this way? Or would this be more of an "April Fool's" hook? (It's particularly confusing when the other candidates do hold the described occupations in real life.) I'm new enough to DYK that I'd appreciate another editor's advice. Thanks, groupuscule (talk) 03:29, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

In the local press, it is frequently referred to as "Dirty Harry vs. Asiong Salonga". Estrada has no qualms about the Asiong Salonga character as that was what made him famous. The wikilinks would be very useful on providing context. –H T D 03:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Good revisions. I like the article and think this would be a fun hook to run. Maybe someone with a little more DYK experience will second guess me, but I think it's a

.

It's difficult to second guess when you don't sign and date your review. (Also, icons should be at the beginning of your review, not at its end where it's difficult to see.) On any talk page, including this one, each new entry should be signed and dated. Equally as important, as a new reviewer, you should show your steps: that the article has actually attained a 5x expansion (if it has), that the hook facts are in the article, inline cited by the end of the sentence that contain them, and the sources contain the information in those sentences. Also, that the hook and article are neutral, and the other DYK requirements are met. That said, the article looks interesting and a likely DYK candidate—I'm fascinated by the notion that an ex-President of the country would want to be a (big) city mayor afterward. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes. My mistake with the signature and the placement of the check mark... I guess I intentionally moved it to signify near complete approval but also in some ways to highlight that it's my newbie opinion. I did already check for the other DYK requirements. So, yeah, the expansion was big enough and the claims were cited. (This article is particularly helpful w/r/t the hook.) The hook is a little bit goofy because it refers to 'cartoony' identities for two of the candidates, but AFAICT that's okay. groupuscule (talk) 17:02, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Can I ask what's the hold-up? It has been expanded and everything that has to be cited is cited.–H T D 05:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)