Template:Did you know nominations/Suriname at the 1960 Summer Olympics
- 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 SL93 talk 22:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Suriname at the 1960 Summer Olympics
- ... that at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was at peace after not competing?
- ALT1: ... that four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found not to have "overslept"?
Arconning (talk) 15:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC).
- I'll review this! Arcahaeoindris (talk) 15:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- Other problems:
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Happy for this to be approved once ALT1 mentioned below is added :) Arcahaeoindris (talk) 07:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- This hook is super interesting and the article is great. I think maybe the hook needs rewording though as it's not clear that this "peace" came more than four decades later. How about "four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to have not "overslept"? I'm also waiting on the plagiarism checker to worki again. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 04:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Arcahaeoindris So that would be "... that four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to have not "overslept"? " Arconning (talk) 15:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Arconning: yes, that sounds good. Please can you add this as Alt1? Thanks! Arcahaeoindris (talk) 07:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- Arcahaeoindris So that would be "... that four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to have not "overslept"? " Arconning (talk) 15:06, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- ALT1a: ... that four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to have not "overslept"?
- ALT1b: ... that four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to not have "overslept"?
- English isn't my mother-tongue but the hook as suggested doesn't sound quite right to me, hence I've also provided an ALT1b version. Schwede66 08:09, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- Schwede66 Arcahaeoindris I believe it's alright now. I believe both are grammatically correct but ALT1a is more fluent. :) Arconning (talk) 09:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- Arconning Hello! Just popping in to note that as a native speaker of (American) English, I'd probably phrase this as "... was found not to have "overslept"?" I think 'found not to have' emphasizes that an investigation determined he didn't do something, in this case oversleeping. See here for an example in NYT. Just my personal thoughts though, I could be wrong. SunTunnels (talk) 01:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Schwede66 Arcahaeoindris I believe it's alright now. I believe both are grammatically correct but ALT1a is more fluent. :) Arconning (talk) 09:42, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- ALT1c: ... that four decades after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found not to have "overslept"?
- @Arconning, Arcahaeoindris, Schwede66, and SunTunnels: Hooks say 'four decades', article implies 45 years (1960 --> 2005). Numbers ending in a five round up, so these are not the same thing. I suggest spelling out "45 years". As for the wording, "to not have" jars way more than "to have not".--Launchballer 23:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- To say "45 years" instead of "four decades" is clearly an improvement. As English isn't my first language, I shall stay away from commenting on the order of those three words "not – have – to". Schwede66 23:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- If WP:DYKHFC wasn't a thing, I'd propose ALT2: ... that 45 years after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to have not "overslept"?. The 2005 bit of the hook does need an end-of-sentence citation, and pronto.--Launchballer 00:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer Would this work? [1] Arconning (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't speak Dutch, so AGF. Whatever you're using, it needs to be in the article no later than the end of the applicable sentence.--Launchballer 08:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer I hope I did it correctly. Arconning (talk) 09:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- That ref corresponds to the bit that says the investigation was in 2005. I think it should be at the end of the sentence ending 'not Esajas' fault' (which I've copyedited to remove an unattributed quote).--Launchballer 10:01, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer I hope I did it correctly. Arconning (talk) 09:42, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't speak Dutch, so AGF. Whatever you're using, it needs to be in the article no later than the end of the applicable sentence.--Launchballer 08:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer Would this work? [1] Arconning (talk) 07:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- If WP:DYKHFC wasn't a thing, I'd propose ALT2: ... that 45 years after missing an event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's sole athlete was found to have not "overslept"?. The 2005 bit of the hook does need an end-of-sentence citation, and pronto.--Launchballer 00:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- To say "45 years" instead of "four decades" is clearly an improvement. As English isn't my first language, I shall stay away from commenting on the order of those three words "not – have – to". Schwede66 23:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Arconning, Arcahaeoindris, Schwede66, and SunTunnels: Hooks say 'four decades', article implies 45 years (1960 --> 2005). Numbers ending in a five round up, so these are not the same thing. I suggest spelling out "45 years". As for the wording, "to not have" jars way more than "to have not".--Launchballer 23:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. All the hooks proposed above appear to share the same inaccuracy. Esajas was never Suriname's sole athlete; he was the sole athlete in its delegation to the 1960 Summer Olympics. I suggest:
- ALT3 ... that in its first appearance at the Olympics, Suriname was represented by a single athlete, who missed his event?
- or:
- ALT4 ... that four decades after missing his event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's first Olympian was found not to have "overslept"? Yngvadottir (talk) 08:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I won't approve a hook with 'four decades' or with 'overslept' in quote marks per my comments above. My bone of contention is that they only proved that his lateness was not his fault. They did not prove what time he actually woke up and common sense dictates that Olympians are too disciplined to just have lie-ins like that. I suggest either:
- ALT5: ... that 45 years after missing his event at the 1960 Summer Olympics, Suriname's first Olympian was found to have not done so deliberately?, or
- ALT6: ... that it took the Suriname Olympic Committee 45 years to honor the country's first Olympian? The latter has an option to substitute 'that' for 'why', as last month's most successful hook was a non-that hook.--Launchballer 11:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Then I think the simple ALT3 (as it's now numbered) is better than any of those that are about the exoneration. Even though the poor man got a raw deal, the article is Suriname at the 1960 Olympics and his missing his event is interesting. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
