Template:Did you know nominations/Barbara Watson (politician)
- The following discussion 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: rejected by Tentinator 08:32, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Barbara Watson (politician)[edit]
... that Sharon Pritchett appeared to win the Democratic primary but after a recount, Barbara Watson (pictured) went from a 14 vote deficit to an 18 vote lead over Prichett?
Created by Tqycolumbia (talk). Nominated by Tentinator (talk) at 11:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC).
"appeared to win" in the hook is " it appeared as though Pritchett had narrowly claimed victory " in the article. However,WP:MOS Words to watch. The next sentence in the article says she was actually declared the winner, and a recount changed that. "appeared to..." should be changed. "appeared as though" should also be changed in the article.— Maile (talk) 00:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
ALT ... that Sharon Pritchett was declared the winner of the Democratic primary but after a recount, Barbara Watson (pictured) went from a 14 vote deficit to an 18 vote lead over Prichett?
The Sun-Sentinel may have reported that Pritchett had won—which was true based on the initial reported results—but "declare" has a definite meaning in elections which requires an official source like the Secretary of State to give the results as official. It may be stated as "declared" in the article, but it really shouldn't be, since the paper merely reported the results; the hook needs to avoid "declared". Basically, it would appear that the original official count showed Pritchett in the lead, but after the recount, the final official count had Watson as the victor. I don't know whether Florida is one of those states with an automatic recount when the margin after the original reported count is below a certain fraction of a percent, but this affects what wording should be used to describe that first count. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
- ALT2 ... that a lawsuit was filed to block Barbara Watson's victory in the Democratic primary after her opponent alleged that there was absentee ballot fraud? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tentinator (talk • contribs) 13:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
- Full review needed, since none of the reviews have yet addressed the DYK basics like size, newness, Suggest a hook focusing on the fact that she's won both her primaries by tiny margins (18 and 13):
- ALT3 ... that Barbara Watson has been elected to the Florida House of Representatives twice after winning her two Democratic primaries by 18 votes and 13 votes respectively?
- New reviewer should check both ALT2 and ALT3 hooks, and whether "declared" is still inappropriately used in the article. —BlueMoonset (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- New and long enough. Spotchecks have not revealed close paraphrasing issues. The "declared" was attributed to a newspaper which seemed fine to me, but I changed the wording to be on the safe side. The history section needs sourcing and also the Primary Elections section could need some improved sourcing, for instance the statement *"move on to the general election, where she was elected unopposed" doesn't seem to have a source to back it up. In addition, the first primary needs to give a year/date. As for hooks, I think ALT3 is fine and sourced (as for ALT2, I would worry that the fraud claim could reflect negatively on the article's subject on the main page). Regards, Iselilja (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2014 (UTC)