Template:Did you know nominations/Our Man Bashir

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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 13:16, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Our Man Bashir

(

)

... that the Star Trek: Deep Space Nine episode "Our Man Bashir" was based in part on James Bond films, something Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer was not happy about?

Reviewed: Agent Carter (TV series)

Improved to Good Article status by Miyagawa (talk). Self nominated at 23:31, 11 May 2014 (UTC).

Date and length OK. AGF on hook. QPQ done. Good to go. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:45, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Did you check for close paraphrasing? Yoninah (talk) 14:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm more concerned about the "AGF on hook" part, since "Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer" is not sourced by the end of the sentence that includes it. This is not an AGF situation, the nomination clearly fails to meet basic DYK requirements. (The other checks should still be done, of course.) BlueMoonset (talk) 16:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I've duplicated the cite from the end of the paragraph and added it to the end of the sentence for the hook fact. Miyagawa (talk) 23:40, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Miyagawa. This still needs a re-review given the errors in the original, one that includes the close paraphrasing check per above (and neutrality also wasn't covered). I do think, as this is an American show, the hook should use "was" rather than "were" for MGM (a single corporation). BlueMoonset (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

I just used page comparison on all the major articles on the first page of Google, and none of them matched on anything other than the episode or series name(s). Yoninah, was the concern above due to a specific passage? Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:46, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

No, it was a general question asking if the reviewer had checked for close paraphrasing or not. It's good to see that more reviewers ARE listing many more points in their review than "GA approved, so it's good to go". I went ahead and reviewed all the online sources; added quote marks to some words lifted directly from the source, and fixed a minor inversion of words in another quote. I also found the Google Preview for the hook source, but alas, those pages weren't included in the Preview. The hook ref is AGF and cited inline. MGM is a company, not a bunch of people, so I changed "were" to "was" in the hook and in the article. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 4 June 2014 (UTC)