Template:Did you know nominations/Open Philanthropy (organization)

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 CSJJ104 (talk) 20:56, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Open Philanthropy (organization)

(

)

... that in their mission to do good effectively, Open Philanthropy has made grants in causes ranging from recession-prevention to cancer vaccines for dogs? Source: Matthews, Dylan (2015-04-24). "You have $8 billion. You want to do as much good as possible. What do you do?". Vox. Retrieved 2022-02-06; Callaway, Ewen (20 December 2017). "Facebook billionaire pours funds into high-risk research". Nature.
- Reviewed: Julie Ngungwa

Improved to Good Article status by Ruthgrace (talk). Self-nominated at 23:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC).

Starting review. Updates to follow shortly. Ktin (talk) 18:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems: - Noted below in comments.

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article meets eligibility criteria - was recently promoted to a good article. Meets length expectations. No issues with tone. This is a tricky space because while writing about organizations it is important to maintain a factual and neutral tone which I think this article does. I think this is validated by the other reviewer Mike Christie's notes as well. On the hook front - I have two concerns and would like to pass back to the nominator for their views. Firstly, my personal read is that the hook reads a tad WP:PUFF with a starting phrase that in their mission to do good effectively. Though one could very well make the argument that their mission is indeed to do good effectively. Nevertheless, I would encourage the nominator to consider rewriting that bit or maybe even consider dropping that bit. Secondly, I have seen DYK reviewers request that the hook be present in the article as-is or as close to the actual sentence as possible. In this case the phrases are indeed used across the article e.g. Grants include $6.4 million to Stephen Johnston and his team at Arizona State University to test a cancer vaccine for middle-aged pet dogs and the organization expects that the value of preventing recessions will be so many times higher than the cost of effective advocacy work that it is willing to invest in it despite success being "highly uncertain". The sourcing looks good. QPQ is done. Ktin (talk) 18:38, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

hey Ktin, thanks for the review! you make great points. Here's an adjusted hook taking your suggestion to make it less puffy:

ALT 1 * ... that Open Philanthropy has made grants in causes ranging from recession-prevention to cancer vaccines for dogs? Source: Matthews, Dylan (2015-04-24). "You have $8 billion. You want to do as much good as possible. What do you do?". Vox. Retrieved 2022-02-06; Callaway, Ewen (20 December 2017). "Facebook billionaire pours funds into high-risk research". Nature.

Ruthgrace (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Ruthgrace:. ALT1 looks good. Marking Approved. Ktin (talk) 16:24, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Just a drive-by comment but ALT1 is fine. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks all! really appreciate it :) Ruthgrace (talk) 18:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)