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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 00:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Comment: This is my 4th DYK nomination, so no QPQ is needed. If there's a stylistic/syntactical issue, feel free to boldly edit the hook itself! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 20:34, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Created by Shushugah (talk). Self-nominated at 20:22, 12 December 2021 (UTC).
Lajmmoore thank you for checking everything, including the plagiarism. I copied the text (with attribution) from Volkswagen Westmoreland Assembly article, and I checked a 2017 version of it, which has the exact same alleged copyright violation. I believe this is a case where the blogspot blog copied without attribution from Wikipedia in January 2018, not the other way around. See this link for comparison of an older version that has exact same text. I am happy to further rephrase it if need be, but if it's a false alert, how can it be marked as such both in this article and Volkswagen Westmoreland Assembly? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey Shushugah - that's so interesting that Earwig picked up the blog, but not the wiki. Either way, because it's such a chunk, it would be great if you could put a note on both talk pages. I do see that its in the edit summary, but (especially with the GA nomination) I do think a note would be helpful! Thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 19:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Lajmmoore I added a notice to both talk pages. It makes sense to me that Earwig wouldn’t look at intra wiki copying, because it’s actively encouraged (with attribution usually, but even that’s exempt when it’s the same author). I’m surprised it doesn’t detect prior versions. I guess citogenesis is still a risk either way, but that’s another story. Thank you for taking the time to review with holiday rush! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:45, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Article is new enough, long enough, and well-cited. QPQ not needed. Hook is interesting. However there is problem with plagiarism, with a big chunk of text directly taken from http://yourgolfchoice.blogspot.com/2018/01/volkswagen-westmoreland-assembly.html. Please refer to this comparison via Earwig https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Volkswagen_worker_organizations. You need to remove or re-write the section of text that is the "Westmorland, Pennsylvania" section. Feel free to ping me once you've done this, but my reply might take a while due to upcoming vacations. Looking forward to moving this interesting topic forward. Lajmmoore (talk) 18:20, 19 December 2021 (UTC)