Template:Did you know nominations/Vermont Ski and Snowboard Museum

The following discussion 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: rejected by — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Per Blue Moon

Vermont Ski and Snowboard Museum

(

)

... that in the 1860's a team of oxen pulled the Vermont Ski and Snowboard Museum building down the main street on rollers to its current site at the south end of the Stowe village in US?

Created/expanded by Jegelewicz (talk). Nominated by Ayanosh (talk) at 05:46, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Date, size are fine, but hooks needs minor tweaking: Stowe, Vermont should be linked, and we say USA, not U.S.A. Further, the sentence with the hoo claim in the article itself is not referenced, I've added a cite tag. Ping me when the alt hook is ready and the cite is added. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:45, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Actually, "USA" and "U.S.A." are both deprecated in WP:MOS; it says to use "US" or "U.S." The hook needs a full rewrite, not just a tweaking: the building wasn't then the Vermont Ski and Snowboard Museum building, it was something else. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing concerns: compare "In the 1860’s a team of oxen pulled the building down Main Street on rollers to its current site at the south end of the village." from this source to the article's "in the 1860’s by a team of oxen which pulled the building down Main Street on rollers to its current site at the south end of Stowe village." That this is the phrase used in the hook is doubly concerning. Even worse is this source from the same website, which has six identical phrases of 10 words or more, the longest of which is the entire second paragraph of the Mission section (one word is changed: "the" becomes "this"). The first paragraph is taken verbatim from the home page.

I'm going to check with one of our copyvio/paraphrase experts, but given what I've found so far, I'm not sure this article can survive. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment: Looks good to me though, specially now. Suggestion noted:

ALT1: ... that during the 1860s a team of oxen pulled down the Vermont Ski Museum on rollers along Stowe's Main Street? Krenakarore ^TK 13:34, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort, but it does not solve the severe underly problem: far too many identical phrases still remain despite the new source citations and rephrasing. At least one of the citations added—Allen's Historical Dictionary of Skiing—is used incorrectly, since it only gives the museum's address, not that it's in located in the 1818 town hall building. (The sentence it's supporting is also problematic.) I think what I was looking for in the hook was something closer to this, though it still needs work:

ALT2: ... that in the 1860s a team of oxen pulled the Stowe town hall building, which today houses the Vermont Ski and Snowboard Museum, on rollers along Main Street? —BlueMoonset (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment: It was easy to "relocate" the reference to it's proper place. I see no problem as for this "too-close-for-comfort paraphrasing" of half a dozen of three or four words reworded from site A or B. That's what you did to the hook, wasn't it? How not to paraphrase the sentence: King Thistle stuck a thousand thistles in the thistle of his thumb?

Alt3: ... that in the 1860s the Vermont Ski Museum was rolled along Stowe's Main Street by a team of oxen? Krenakarore ^TK 16:40, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Whether you see it or not, the paraphrasing and direct copying is a serious problem, and Wikipedia has definitive policies in place: please see WP:COPYVIO and WP:FAIRUSE. The infringing material has been removed from the article, which is now slightly below the minimum 1500 prose characters required by DYK. Another non-infringing sentence or two will be needed. ALT3, like ALT1 and the original hook, remains problematic because the museum did not exist until the 1980s, and therefore could not be pulled anywhere in the 1860s. The building that would eventually house the museum in the 2000s was moved in the 1860s: hook facts must be accurate. I also think it would be better to use the full current name of the museum rather than the old name. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:20, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you, and like this we move "back" to the starting point. You know, I am not against, I am pro, that's why I wanted to help the guy achieve his goal. Better improve than supress ! As for me, important is the story behind the article, the place, the people, the time, not a "serves-me-for-nothing" DYK batch. As for you dear, know that in me you have found a friend...............:) ! Krenakarore ^TK 22:31, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

As things stand, we need the nominator or the creator to expand to the raised concerns. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

On July 27, Nikkimaria removed a lot of text notated as being copyvio. The only other recent activity on this article has been an August 7 add of an inductee list, by the article's creator. Maile66 (talk) 19:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

In the absence of further activity, and given the earlier problems that have not been corrected including hook issues, I'm regretfully reinstating the orange X. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)