Template:Did you know nominations/Straight Deal

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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: rejected by Allen3 ^talk 00:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
No progress in addressing issues for a week, nominator has been inactive since making this nomination

Straight Deal

(

)

... that Straight Deal has been classified as one of the best British horses of the 20th century?

Created/expanded by Tigerboy1966 (talk). Nominated by The little green pig (talk) at 01:39, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment - Not sure if the Hook is quite accurate because the relevant sentence in the article states that, "...the one hundred and forty-eighth best British horse of the 20th Century, with a rating of 132." Now, 132 is very good I'm sure but "one of the best horses" might be misleading. Just a thought. How about simply "was rated as the 132nd best British horse of the 20th century". It's so specific it's quite interesting I think :-) Witty lama 12:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me, but I think it should be the 148th best. I think the 132 is some kind of point system and the 148 is it's actual ranking. The little green pig (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

This apparently has not had a review. Here I go.

Hook: I understand Wittylama's position, so an alt like "... that Straight Deal has been classified as the 148th best British horse of the 20th century?" is acceptable. I still prefer the original though. AGF on source, although the hook fact should be written 148th in the article.

Article: New enough as of the date of the nomination, long enough. Referencing needs work. One whole paragraph is not cited near the bottom, and about 200 words of text in the article are not cited either, including possibly contentious material like "being especially successful with his fillies including Ark Royal, Kerkeb and Above Board, all of whom won the Yorkshire Oaks." References also need better formatting; the newspaper citations should have publication dates. Paraphrasing checks seem okay; I checked this.

Summary:

References need improvement. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:31, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Issues unaddressed in one week. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)