Talk:Demise and revival of compulsory figures

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Did you know nomination[edit]

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 13:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
Sonja Morgenstern from Germany skates a compulsory figure, 1971
Sonja Morgenstern from Germany skates a compulsory figure, 1971

Created by Figureskatingfan (talk). Self-nominated at 23:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Demise and revival of compulsory figures; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

The hook still seems quite complicated and hard to read. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:42, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: let's do some cutting then. ALT4: ... that a revival of compulsory figures began in 2015, when the first World Figure Championships occurred in Lake Placid, New York? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Could we have some movement on this, please? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a review of the article, but not really a fan of the hook since compulsory figures may not be a concept that's easily understandable by non-specialist readers. I'll ask for help for any possible hook suggestions because I think the current direction isn't working out. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I asked for some suggestions on Discord and someone suggested the following:
ALT5 ... that professional figure skating did not require its namesake figures for 25 years?
@Figureskatingfan: How does it sound? To me at least it solves the issues with specialism that the previous proposals had. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: ALT5 doesn't describe what the article is about, which is the demise and revival of compulsory figures. Plus, there are no sources in the article that support it. Also, the World Figure Championships isn't a professional event and the sport still doesn't require compulsory figures. One of the reasons for an interesting hook is to motivate the reader to click the link and learn about a new article. ALT4 has the potential of the reader thinking, "What are compulsory figures and what's the reason for its revival?" and go to the article to find out. Re:specialism: I could point to DYKs on the main page on any given day and make the same interpretation. Believe me, I've come across this objection about almost every figure skating article I've put up for assessment and it's not a strong argument. I don't think we should remove the technical aspects about figure skating from a DYK hook, either. Consequently, I ask that you approve ALT4. Thanks, Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is in the rules: a hook has to avoid being reliant on specialist knowledge, especially without context. If you have an issue with those other hooks, that would be worth raising on WT:DYK, but WP:OSE is not an argument when it comes to why such a hook could be allowed that time but not this. As for the article itself, it meets requirements and a QPQ has been done, but ALT4 as currently written won't work per WP:DYKINT (a hook should be "likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest"). The article relies on quotes from the CBS Sportsline quote: most are correctly attributed, but a few are unattributed paraphrases, so that needs to be addressed. My suggestion would be to workshop ALT5 further to address the issues about accuracy or sourcing, but ALT4 won't do. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then I'd like to suggest ALT6: ... that Olympic figure skater Debi Thomas came in second place in a 2023 competition in compulsory figures? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's even worse. What is significant about her coming in second place? Why would a non-figure skating fan find this significant? Plus ALT6 is even less to do with the demise and revival of figures than what ALT5 is trying to say. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because she's Debi Thomas. Her coming in second place is like Tiger Woods not coming in first, either. The only reason a non-golf fan would know that it's important is because golf gets more media coverage than figure skating. I'm afraid that you'd have the same problem with any hook I suggest, a recurring issue with submitting figure skating articles for any peer review across Wikipedia. And it has a lot to do with the revival of figures because it was the first competition to bring back figures in any competition. I'm also not sure this discussion is going anywhere, so I'd like a second reviewer, please. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just not seeing the issue here. Is ALT5 or a variant thereof really not workable? The other hooks seem to primarily be targeted towards skating fans, not general audiences, which goes against the spirit of DYK and the guidelines. If there have been repeated concerns about figure skating hooks on Wikipedia, maybe there's a reason to that: perhaps reviewers in general are just seeing the hooks as too technical or specialist. I just can't see why moving forward with some variant of ALT5 (even if not in its current form) isn't an option considering it seems like an actual interesting hook especially to non-skating fans and is likely to make them read more, unlike the other hooks which are likely to just turn readers away. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I want to make a separate comment. Most people who read the Main Page of Wikipedia are not figure skating fans, and a fair number will not know of the sport.
Some of this is simply because of the geographic diversity of our readership. Our Top 25 Reports really illustrate this. Ever heard of Ram Mandir? The Africa Cup of Nations? Shoaib Malik? These are all topics that got lots of pageviews at some point in recent weeks, and I doubt you will have heard of most of them. Even in places with more figure skating, not everyone will have heard of Debi Thomas.
As a veteran of DYK with a heavy contribution in an esoteric topic area (broadcasting in the US), I've thrown out a lot of dud hooks. Hooks that require knowledge of some or other name, like Lachlan Murdoch or John Seigenthaler, are among my worst performers. Regularly. Your ALT6 would fail to inspire a lot of interest. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 08:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a reviewer, but I'd just like to pitch in and say I do agree that none of these hooks are interesting or honestly just pretty confusing as they require prior knowledge. I don't really think the article will work for DYK if this is the best it can produce. TheBritinator (talk) 16:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to echo what NLH5, Sammi, and Britinator said above. Most Main Page readers will know about something like, say, the World Cup, but not everyone is going to know about figure skating. If it is necessary to explain that Debi Thomas is the Tiger Woods of figure skating, then it is likely a good indicator that it may not be interesting to a casual reader. On the other hand, something like "... that Olympic figure skater Debi Thomas came in second place in a 2023 competition in compulsory figures, despite not having skated at all for 12 years?" might be more interesting. A hook like that doesn't require any special knowledge, but a contestant who scored 2nd, despite having stopped competing in that sport for over a decade, would likely attract readers regardless of the nature of the sport. Epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I just noticed that Thomas is an orthopedic surgeon. Although that's not what she's primarily known for, an Olympic-skating orthopedic surgeon, scoring 2nd in a sport she hasn't practiced at all in 12 years, sounds interesting to me. Epicgenius (talk) 16:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yah, Thomas is an awesome human being. @Epicgenius: I was going to suggest a hook like yours but I was going for shortness before. ALT7: "... that Olympic figure skater Debi Thomas came in second place in a 2023 competition in compulsory figures, despite not having skated at all for 12 years?" Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:41, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I think that would be an interesting hook. However, as I proposed this hook, it would be better for a third party to double-check this. Epicgenius (talk) 16:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My main concern with the Debi Thomas angle is that it seems to be more about Thomas rather than compulsory figures themselves. If the others are fine with Epic's wording though I won't object. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT8: ... that "dirty judging" has been cited as a factor behind the temporary demise of compulsory figures in ice skating?--Launchballer 09:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with ALT7. ALT8 is also good, although with this change: ALT9: ... that "dirty judging" has been cited as a factor behind the temporary demise of compulsory figures in figure skating? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT9 is fine with me. Narutolovehinata5?--Launchballer 08:18, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure. I'm fine with the hook fact itself, but ALT9 has "figure" repeated too close to each other in my opinion. I'd say ALT8 is better, but ALT9 is more precise. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I changed "ice skating" to "figure skating" because the latter is the name of the sport and the former is more general and can refer to anything from a non-athlete skating at any rink or even to hockey. Not only is the change more precise, it's accurate. As a result, I'm against using ALT8. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT10: ... that "dirty judging" has been cited as a factor behind the temporary removal of compulsory figures from international single skating competitions?--Launchballer 13:10, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT10 isn't great, but acceptable. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Came to review, but. If you don't mind me saying so, the reason the 'interestingness' of the hook has been questioned is due to the very nicheness of the sport itself (which of course even the article admits). So Occam's answer would seem to be to focus not so much on the sport—which is relatively unknown—but to use the WSJ's comments, which, as a broadbased newspaper, everyone will recognise. The article's own sentence almost does it for you. Something like

It comes in at 181 chars, and I think it ticks the boxes: touches a broader public (e,g. people might have read about it in the WSJ) while remaining focussed on the sport itself. Also, mentioning the Olympics will drum up interest (whether we like it or not, I think!). Paging involved parties: @Figureskatingfan, Narutolovehinata5, BlueMoonset, Sammi Brie, Epicgenius, and Launchballer: ——Serial Number 54129 16:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me, would want to hear from the nominator.--Launchballer 09:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Narutolovehinata5, thanks for the review. I wonder if I had used the word "nicheness" (which I will use from now on) before, this wouldn't be so long. I'm fine with your hook, but to be picky, I'd change one word because "ice skating" can mean figure skating, but it can also mean hockey, speed skating, etc. It still comes in under 200 characters. ALT12: ... that The Wall Street Journal considered the removal of compulsory figures from Olympic figure skating an "obvious" decision, and subsequent attempts to revive them as "surprising"? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 23:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fine by me, although if changing "figure skating" allows sufficient breath, then surely ALT13: ... that "dirty judging" has been cited as a factor behind the temporary demise of compulsory figures in Olympic figure skating? should also be acceptable.--Launchballer 09:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like the ALT12 better. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK let's get this show on the road. At this rate, by the time the review is done, they'll have banned the thing again.
    Review of ALT12: The article recently created at point of nom. Article is long (2396 words), neutral and well-sourced. The hook is cited in the article (see my sourcing of ALT11) and within length. There are no close paraphrasing issues. Hook is now interesting. QPQ done. Good to go. ——Serial Number 54129 15:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like Christie and Karen figured out wikipedia[edit]

Good job figuring out how to edit Wikipedia, Christie. Now work on learning to skate! 2603:7080:903:C00B:6103:C1A3:6D7A:EB6D (talk) 10:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Demise_and_revival_of_compulsory_figures&oldid=1216848927"