Template:Did you know nominations/Stephen J. Herben Jr.

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Gatoclass (talk) 09:52, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Stephen J. Herben Jr.‎, George Foster Herben, Grace Foster Herben, Stephen J. Herben[edit]

( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links:
)

Created by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 19:35, 19 March 2018 (UTC).

  • TonyTheTiger, wasn't intended that way, but it's definitely tongue in cheek and I'd have no problem with it running then. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:13, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • The hook is so odd that I think it should actually be an April Fools hook, IMO. I am unfamiliar if there are special review standards for that date. BlueMoonset, do I review this differently if it is for April fools? Do you think we should move this nomination?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • TonyTheTiger, how much do they need to be expanded? Nothing in any of the articles was copied to another, although as I created three of them in the same day and as they deal with the same family, the voice and some of the content is obviously similar.--Usernameunique (talk) 05:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • The copyvio detector below has determined that you are using sources similarly enough in different articles to generate exactly the same copyvio percentage.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • There is probably an exact number, but I'll eyeball it and say you should get each article to over 1800 characters or one to over 2000.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:35, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • TonyTheTiger, expanded George Foster Herben to 2,235 and Grace Foster Herben to 2,042. That said, using the same references in different articles is not the same thing as copying prose from one to another. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Stephen J. Herben Jr. 5x expansion began on March 13.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
    • The copyvio detector has assessed the probabilities as follows: Stephen J. Herben Jr. - 19.4%, George Foster Herben - 11.5%, Grace Foster Herben - 11.5% (for the same content), and Stephen J. Herben - 8.3%. I don't know what the standards are in general, but I would like content to be rephrased to reduce the percentages below 5 or 10% (preferably 5).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:30, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
      • Looking more closely at the 19.4% content has led me to question whether you are using proper WP:ICs. The source is only in the bibliography. If we have a copyvio warning for something in the bib and not the actual references, I infer failure to use ICs.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:52, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
        • TonyTheTiger, the 19.4% (Stephen J. Herben Jr.) is purely the result of a quotation that is cited—see reference #47 (there's your inline citation), which via sfn footnotes links to the bibliography—and the title of a paper. Meanwhile, the 11.5% of George Foster Herben and Grace Foster Herben is purely because of the long title of one book (Woman's Who's who of America: A Biographical Dictionary of Contemporary Women of the United States and Canada). The 8.3 for Stephen J. Herben is the result of the use of roles and institutions ("associate editor of The Epworth Herald" ... "Morrow Memorial Methodist Episcopal Church in Maplewood" ... "book publicity for the Methodist Book Concern"). --Usernameunique (talk) 18:04, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • QPQ done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:38, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
  • TonyTheTiger, I'm probably not the best person to say whether this would make an appropriate April Fools' Day hook; better to let Gatoclass weigh in on that. In terms of other qualifications, if it meets the DYK criteria for a regular nomination (there isn't an icon posted yet, so I can't confirm that), it meets them for April Fools', since the latter has looser newness criteria (it only has to have been created since the previous April Fools' Day). We can worry about moving it once it's been passed and the hook deemed appropriate. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:39, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
This is good to go. Gatoclass, do you think this should be moved to the April Fools Day page?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:01, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
I think this is an interesting hook Tony but I don't think it's an April Fools hook, as it's a plain statement of fact with no element of deception, and also, while unusual, it's not a fact I would describe as amazing or incredible because it's well known that people from all walks of life are capable of committing crimes. Gatoclass (talk) 10:20, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
But while I'm commenting on this nomination, I might add that it seems to me that the information about the shooting should be in the article of the shooter, not his brother. Also, I can't see where it says in the article that the father "came under suspicion" so I think that needs to be clarified before this can be promoted. Gatoclass (talk) 10:30, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger and Gatoclass, moved the material to George Foster Herben. Here's a new hook:
ALT1: ... that after philologist Stephen J. Herben Jr.‎'s physician brother shot their missionary mother, their reverend father said he would not let the facts be known? --Usernameunique (talk) 01:18, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Yes Gato is right. Where is the suspicion content?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:05, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger & Gatoclass, the suspicion is more implied than stated in the articles (e.g., "police are suspicious" placed against Herben Sr.'s refusal to discuss the details, as in this article). However, ALT1, above, relies on explicitly stated facts. --Usernameunique (talk) 20:11, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
You need to add the content from the hook to the article. I don't see the content of either hook in the article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger, it's pretty explicit: "'I don't intend to make any of the facts known', Herben Sr. said." --Usernameunique (talk) 11:50, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
The incident is only mentioned in George Foster Herben's article (there is no DYK requirement that all hook facts are in all articles of a multi-article hook). By referring to "philologist" and "physician brother", what the two sons later became, it obscures the fact (which the article doesn't make as clear as it could) that George was 13 years old at the time, and Stephen Jr. was all of 9. (I struck the original hook due to the "implied" mentioned above; we do need explicitly stated facts.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger & BlueMoonset, added age to the article. The use of "philologist" and "physician" was to give some credit to the individuals beyond an unfortunate incident in their early years, but here's another suggestion:
ALT2: ... that after a future philologist's older brother shot their missionary mother, their reverend father said he would not let the facts be known? --Usernameunique (talk) 19:18, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't see that in the WP article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger, which facts in ALT2 don't you see in the George Foster Herben article? Please be more specific. Doesn't Stephen J. Herben Jr. become a philologist? Isn't George the older brother of Stephen? Didn't George shoot his mother? (Or is that insufficiently clear?) Wasn't Grace a missionary? Wasn't Stephen Sr. a reverend? And, finally, what about the reverend's quote "I don't intend to make any of the facts known", Herben Sr. said. does not adequately cover "not let the facts be known"? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:34, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I was looking for the quote in the Stephen J. Herben article. let me think about what should be where.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
O.K. what do you think about the fact that the person who was shot has no content about it in her article? The content would be redundant, but I think valuable in the mother's article. A brief summary about the situation should probably be in Sr.'s article. I am open for discussion on this topic, but I would look for content about the issue in those articles too. Maybe the shooter should have the most detail, but the victim should have some and Sr. seems to have an ancillary involvement.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:50, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

TonyTheTiger, I've added some information to the Grace Foster Herben and Stephen J. Herben articles, with {{further}} templates to indicate that most of the information is in the George Foster Herben article. In the future, it would be helpful if you raised such issues, and indeed conducted the entire review, all at once. Raising the issues in a piecemeal fashion, as above, makes them harder and more time consuming to address, and makes the state of the review harder to ascertain. I suspect that this has also negatively impacted some of your own nominations, such as that of Zavier Simpson, where the large number of comments created a lengthy nomination that likely dissuaded reviewers from taking it on. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I am not a big fan of the further template, but I guess it is O.K. I don't have a lot of time for WP, like I use to. I do things in smaller chunks now. In terms of this review, I was just looking for content in the wrong article and there was some confusion. It is clearer now.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Looks good now.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

  • I have returned this from the queue because in reviewing the sources it appears that half of them state that the mother accidentally shot herself. Gatoclass (talk) 15:53, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
I guess you could change it to "reportedly shot". Gatoclass (talk) 09:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Gatoclass, my reading is that she was shot in the process of the rifle being handed over from son to mother. Only one source (link) says otherwise, and it was published before all the facts had come out (note the "apparently": "The boy apparently found something to matter with his rifle and he gave it to Mrs. Herben. Mrs. Herben was looking it over, when, in some unaccountable manner, it was discharged.") All other sources that speak on the subject, including the last to be published (link) say that she was shot as the rifle was handed over ("as [Foster] handed [the rifle] to his mother for examination the shell was discharged, and bullet lodging just above the left knee."). --Usernameunique (talk) 17:28, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Usernameunique, no it didn't or I would have responded earlier. I have my hands full trying to keep the queues updated with verified sets right now along with the associated issues, and because this isn't a straightforward fix, I've had to put it on the backburner for a while along with a few other nominations that got pulled for one reason or another. I will get back to this, but it may have to wait until we've gone back to a 24-hour cycle and I have more time, which probably won't be too long now - a week at the most I would think. Gatoclass (talk) 12:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Stephen_J._Herben_Jr.&oldid=841972556"