Template:Did you know nominations/March 701
The following is an archived discussion of March 701's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know
(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.
The result was: rejected by —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 15:57, 20 April 2013 (UTC).
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
March 701[edit]
- ... that despite having been designed and built in only three months, and being March Engineering's very first Formula One racing car, the March 701 (pictured) won three of its first four races?
- ALT1: ... that although Jackie Stewart described it as "the most difficult F1 car I drove" (pictured), March 701 cars won three of the first four races they entered?
- ALT2: ... that despite being designed and built in only three months, March Engineering's first Formula One racing car, the March 701 (pictured), won three of its first four races?
- Reviewed: Saint George Orthodox Cathedral
- Comment: New article over redirect. Majority of article moved from sandbox, but significant additions and alterations once in mainspace.
Created by Pyrope (talk). Self nominated at 06:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC).
Length and history are OK. However, although the hook facts are sourced (I'll take them AGF), the article as a whole, per my recent tagging, is missing citations in a lot of places. Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. Some of those tags I would contest, as citations are only required for information that is challenged or is likely to be challenged (is the statement that the car has a wing between the rear wheels really likely to be challenged when the sentence appears directly adjacent to a picture of the car showing a wing between the rear wheels?) but some are justified. However, finding the correct citations might take time as the article was build from a large number of dead-tree format sources and so tracking down the precise locations is going to be lengthy. Pyrope 16:44, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- DYK rules require a minimum of one inline citation per paragraph, and there are many paragraphs that are completely uncited. The section citation templates will also be an issue, as will, unfortunately, the large number of "citation needed" templates beyond these. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:00, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
- As mentioned, this may take some time. The article grew in my sandbox slowly over a period of months, during which time I moved apartments. Hence, many of the hard copy magazine articles required are in boxes so will take some considerable time and effort to find. Also, as you might see from my editing pattern lately, I am busy. Perhaps when Wikipedia starts mailing out a salary cheque I will drop everything to respond to minor quibbles, but for now you will take what you are given. If you want to close this nomination on the back of that then that's up to you, no skin off my nose, but I do think many keeners here tend to forget that plenty of editors do not spend hours a day amending Wikipedia. Things will happen slowly. Pyrope 15:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
- Pyrope, DYK is for new—or by the time it is approved, at least newish—material. Which means that slowly and long periods of silence in an active review can cause requests for progress reports and action. We realize that people have other calls on their time, but those demands are not necessarily compatible with DYK approval if issues arise and are not addressed. Since you have asked us to take what we have been given, we will do just that: unfortunately, in the article's present state that is insufficient for listing on DYK, so the nomination will be closed shortly. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)