Template:Did you know nominations/Bacon and Hams
- 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 Fuebaey (talk) 01:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bacon and Hams
[edit]
... that Bacon and Hams is rare and collectible, despite having entered the public domain?
- Reviewed: Not a self-nomination.
Improved to Good Article status by ChrisGualtieri (talk). Nominated by Bloom6132 (talk) at 01:44, 12 November 2014 (UTC).
- ALT1:
... that the book Bacon and Hams is a rare and collectible item, despite having entered the public domain?
The article looks good to go. But the hook seems a bit off. It should be emphasized that Bacon and Hams is a book. Also, there should be the word "a" right before the word rare. I provided an ALT hook. Let me know what you think. Please ping me. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:30, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Per WP:DYK#Content, a hook should be "short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article". Not every hook needs to be fully self-explanatory, and the way I originally worded it would draw more people to the article than your unsurprising, matter-of-fact ALT1. New review requested. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:09, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- Interesting article on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF. I like the first part of the original hook. Is it sourced that the book entered the public domain? Didn't find it easily. Sorry, "despite having entered" sounds not punchy to me. If sourced I would perhaps reword:
- ALT2:
... that Bacon and Hams entered the public domain but is rare and collectible?--Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
- None of the hooks makes sense. In general things are collectible because (not in spite of) the fact that they are old (and therefore PD). Anyway, I don't see how it's known that it's PD.
- ALT3 ... that Bacon and Hams includes an "unparalleled fold-out pig"?
EEng (talk) 18:40, 13 December 2014 (UTC) (ping EtienneDolet)
- Nice but not (yet) in the article, only in the lead where it's not sourced ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- It's at the very end. EEng (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, I stopped reading again when I found "The book includes fold-out anatomical charts that were popular during the time."
ALT3 --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:19, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- It's at the very end. EEng (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- Nice but not (yet) in the article, only in the lead where it's not sourced ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry to prolong this, but there's too much good material here to let it go to waste:
- ALT4 ... that Bacon and Hams includes a portrait (pictured) of "The Author in Fancy Dress as a Side of Bacon, designed by himself ... at the Covent Garden Fancy Dress Ball" plus an "unparalleled fold-out pig"?
If someone can establish the author's date of death we'd be able to include the marvelous photo seen here [1]. (BTW the source cited for "rare and collectible" doesn't actually say that about this book.) EEng (talk) 21:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
- ALT4 great and sourced. I suggest to take the shorter, with the image and to the point
- ALT5: ... that Bacon and Hams includes a portrait (pictured) of "The Author in Fancy Dress as a Side of Bacon, designed by himself, which took the First Prize of Forty Guineas at the Covent Garden Fancy Dress Ball"?
- Please insert the prize winning to the article body and sort the ref numbers.
- ALT3-5, ALT5 preferred, and the image can go only with ALT 4-5. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 14 December 2014 (UTC)