Template talk:Did you know/The First Domino

The First Domino

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 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 Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle}

~~... that the writer of The First Domino play, about the 1999 nail bomb in Brixton, was injured in the attack?~~
... that the writing of the English play, The First Domino, was inspired by its author's injury in a 1999 nail bomb attack in Soho?
ALT1: ... that the writing of the English play, The First Domino, was inspired by its author's injury in a 1999 nail bomb attack at the Admiral Duncan pub, in Soho? SJ Morg (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ... that the writing of the English play, The First Domino, was inspired by its author's injury in a 1999 nail bomb attack in Soho? SJ Morg (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed: #Battlefield Heroes (film)
Comment: Article was created today [1] but had no references; I've checked every statement, added inline references, removed anything unverifiable, and extensively formatted the article. I have not come across any plagiarising concerns at any stage. If others can improve the grammar of the hook, that's fine with me.
Comment: Would a better link be ...about the 1999 [[Brixton#Brixton_bombing|nail bomb in Brixton]], ...? == Brixton#Brixton_bombing

Created by Wotnoww (talk), Chzz (talk). Nominated by Chzz (talk) at 15:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a comment and signature (or just a signature if endorsing) after each aspect you have reviewed:
Hook

Length, format, content rules: SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Source: SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Interest: SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Image suitability, if applicable: (not applicable)
ALT hooks, if proposed:

Article

Length: SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Vintage: SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sourcing (V, RS, BLP): SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neutrality: SJ Morg (talk) 08:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Plagiarism/close paraphrasing: SJ Morg (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Copyvio: 2 images have now been added, but both appear to be within policy. SJ Morg (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious faults in prose, structure, formatting: No major problems, but I recommend adding a subsection heading or two, and removing some paragraph breaks so as to reduce the number of very short paragraphs. SJ Morg (talk) 08:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments/discussion: I'd probably use the linking in the original suggested hook, as the text on the specific incident would still be found by anyone clicking on Brixton and reading that page, and the text at that page's section, Brixton#Brixton_bombing, is only seven sentences. However, either would be OK. SJ Morg (talk) 08:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Nominator needs to review another nomination. SJ Morg (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)~~[reply]

~~I have now reviewed something [2].~~ Chzz ► 10:02, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Taking another look, I realized that the article says virtually nothing about the plot of the play. For an article named for this play, it really must include a brief synopsis of the play itself, at least a few sentences. The closest the article comes to this thus far appears to be the sentence (two-thirds of the way in), "The play was initially a two-hander about ...." It needs more, and placed in the first or second paragraph. Then, please put in at least one or two section headings, as mentioned earlier. The very last sentence (within a quotation) mentions bigotry and homophobia, but the article doesn't actually say what those have to do with this play. Sorry I didn't notice this yesterday. SJ Morg (talk) 11:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted, yes. Apologies. I've been working on it since; I've considerably restructured it, adding quite a few further details. I'm adding more. Chzz ► 07:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's looking much better now. The first sentence of the new plot section is borderline close paraphrasing, but it may be OK. However, the source for that info. does not meet WP:RS; it's someone's personal blog, as indicated on its own page ("About Doolee"), and in most cases blogs are not considered appropriate sources for Wikipedia. (Thousands of WP pages use such sources, but that doesn't mean it's OK, and for DYK the standard is higher.) Can you find a better source to cite for a brief plot synopsis? Something from the mainstream media? SJ Morg (talk) 10:21, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This has been addressed now. SJ Morg (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the hook has to be changed - the Admiral Duncan was the Soho bomb, not the Brixton one. I shall try to think up a better hook, if I don;t come up with something, just swapping Soho in for Brixton will work. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 08:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected the hook (at top of nomination). SJ Morg (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, SJ Morg. I am trying to find time to tweak it a bit more - and will endeavour to do so - but, yes, I think it's good enough to proceed. Thanks for your patience and care with this nom. Chzz ► 09:24, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]