Template:Did you know nominations/Sydney Jewish Museum
- 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 Allen3 talk 12:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Sydney Jewish Museum
[edit]... that Australia has a higher proportion of Holocaust survivors than any country except Israel, many records are held in the Sydney Jewish Museum.
5x expanded by Odysseus voyage14 (talk). Nominated by Aliaretiree (talk) at 21:53, 26 December 2015 (UTC).
- I have noticed this is untranscluded and will fix that after posting this. The x5 expansion here is questionable. The article was severely shortened on 18 November, down to 139 characters. A month later, an expansion to over 2400 characters was done. This expansion did not re-use the blanked content and is way over x5, but the pre-blanking version was actually longer (2880 characters), likely because the current article has a list. I would be inclined to accept the expansion but others should comment too. @Odysseus voyage14 and Aliaretiree: did you notice the blanking? EdChem (talk) 13:01, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- We were not aware of the previous blanking of the article but on closer examination the pre-blanking text appears to have been based entirely on the museum's website with insufficient referencing and did not have NPOV. The improvements to the shortened text have all been referenced and draw on a variety of sources to ensure a NPOV. Aliaretiree (talk) 23:47, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
- Earwig's copyvio detector confirms the pre-blanked version was a copy-vio and so measuring from the blanked length is correct. Thus x5 expansions confirmed. EdChem (talk) 02:16, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
I question the accuracy of the hook fact. It is sourced to an offline article in the Sydney Morning Herald about a certain person. Do you have other sources to back this up? (I would think the United States has the second-largest number of Holocaust survivors.) Yoninah (talk) 10:53, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
- Two additional references supporting the hook fact from The Medical Journal of Australia and the Journal of Traumatic Stress have been added by User:Odysseus voyage14 #1Lib1Ref Aliaretiree (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for the cites. Here is a full review: New enough (I accept this as a new article because the blanked content was a copyvio from the Museum's website and should have been deleted), long enough, well referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. However, the hook needs to be reformatted per DYK style. I suggest:
- ALT1: ... that the Sydney Jewish Museum records the contribution that Holocaust survivors have made to Australia, which has more survivors per capita than any country except Israel?
Another reviewer will need to check the revised hook fact. Yoninah (talk) 23:05, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
This article was 5x expanded on December 23, 2015, the article is over 1500 characters, and the article complies with core policies (passed Earwig's copyvio test). There are no issues with images, and the nominator is exempt from the QPQ requirement. ALT1 is under 200 characters, it is interesting, and it is substantiated by inline citations to a reliable sources. However, it is unclear from the article and the source whether the claim about survivors per-capita is about Jewish survivors or all survivors. The article cites the Medical Journal of Australia, which says that "Australia has the largest per-capita Holocaust survivor population outside Israel"
, so either way the claim is supported by the source. Also, this is not relevant to passing this DYK review, but the article includes several citations to the homepage of the museum's website, even though the article references content that is located in other portions of the museum's website. At some point, the author should change the citations so that the URLs link directly to the portion of the website to which the article is referring. In any case, thanks for improving this article -- it is a fantastic addition to the encyclopedia! Best, -- Notecardforfree (talk) 19:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
