Template:Did you know nominations/Ronald MacKenzie
- 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 Sven Manguard Wha? 16:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ronald MacKenzie
[edit]- ... that Ronald MacKenzie co-sponsored legislation that would have killed the Green Monster?
- Reviewed: Sandplace
Created by Hirolovesswords (talk). Self nominated at 18:31, 25 March 2014 (UTC).
This article looks pretty good. It is new enough (created the 24th), long enough, it appears to be very well cited, and it seems neutral to me. The QPQ checks out. I am going to AGF on the many offline sources, and the hook is interesting (at least to me). One concern. It may just be me, but the hook doesn't seem to flow perfectly. I would probably substitute "legislation" for "a bill", but that may just be me. Overall, looks pretty good. Thanks, - Awardgive. Help out with Project Fillmore County 23:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
The "Green Monster" appears nowhere in the MacKenzie article itself, and it must (and be properly supported) in order for this hook to be used. Even if this is a special term for something else in the article, the article has to use that term. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- Fixed --Hirolovesswords (talk) 13:56, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Hirolovesswords. There's a bit more to do: the sentence in question needs to have an inline source citation at its end; I'd add it myself, but as the likely sources are offline I can't. In addition, there's something wrong with the end of the Congressional bid section; the explanation does not make sense as currently written, and again I can't check the sources. Since the resignation vacating the seat was effective May 1, I'm guessing that Governor Sargent thought it didn't make sense to have a special election using the old districts given that the new post-census districts were already set and were taking effect that fall with the regular primary and general election. But it's just a guess; you have access to the sources, and can clarify the text based on them. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:02, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- Added the citation and removed the Congressional bid section altogether. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 18:05, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry I missed this. Even after the section deletion, the article has 4238 prose characters, well over twice the minimum length required for DYK. The hook facts are in the article and supported by offline sources, hence the AGF tick. Also AGF that there is no close paraphrasing, as it is not possible to check the many offline sources. Edited the hook to expand the contraction, as Wikipedia frowns on "would've". BlueMoonset (talk) 15:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)