Template:Did you know nominations/Melissa Ong
- 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) 07:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Melissa Ong
Selfie of Ong, commonly replicated by the Step Chickens
- ... that "Step Chickens" on TikTok replace their profile pictures with an image (shown) of Melissa Ong, whom they call "Mother Hen"?
- Reviewed: r/antiwork
- Comment: Image is still in the process of obtaining permission, so please hold until it is :)
Created by Theleekycauldron (talk). Self-nominated at 12:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC).
- Hmmm.... I'll review this KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 19:37, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- [1] this seems like a good source to add in if you fancy KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 19:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
My main concern is that the prose is not "tight" enuf. This reads too much like a puff piece with many superfluous "facts" about her and her "cult". I'm sure she's notable (although I find that bewildering...) but the article could use some trimming while the image is waiting to be cleared. KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 19:53, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce: argh! that's what happens when the sources get granular on silly things. I've done some culling – possibly take a look and point out any puffery that remains? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 23:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Will give it the holy tick once the image clears. Otherwise the article is new and long enough, with an interesting hook that's appropriately referenced. No evidence of copyvio. I would recommend removing the "(shown on the right)" for the benefit of mobile users, but that's about it. Merry Christmas! KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 12:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: The image seems to have been deleted. Do you wish to proceed without it anyway? BorgQueen (talk) 14:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @BorgQueen: No, thank you, I'm fairly sure I'd rather wait. I'm in contact with the creator, waiting on her to do the necessary stuff to release the image. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: The image seems to have been deleted. Do you wish to proceed without it anyway? BorgQueen (talk) 14:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce: argh! that's what happens when the sources get granular on silly things. I've done some culling – possibly take a look and point out any puffery that remains? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 23:00, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I shall reach out one more time – we'll proceed without the image if it's not released within a week or so. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Kingoflettuce: Image has cleared! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- @BorgQueen: Kol's been inactive for a few days, wanna give this the holy tick? You can just tick per him. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:24, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Sure thing. But then I can't promote it now... lol BorgQueen (talk) 21:29, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
- d'oh :) it is what it is. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
