Template:Did you know nominations/Comet Ping Pong

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Allen3 talk 13:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues

DYK toolbox

Comet Ping Pong[edit]

(
)

Created by Nomader (talk). Self nominated at 00:12, 9 October 2013 (UTC).

  • Reviewed; No copyvio. But perhaps you could tweak this DYK a bit so that is more neutral.TeriEmbrey (talk) 19:20, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I see your point, I'll look at what I can do when I get home from work tonight. Most of the sources seem to be tilted in a positive direction toward the restaurant so I'll see if I can find more things (especially to flesh out the conflict section). I'll also modify the hook then too. Nomader (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
  • This has been sat here for 2 weeks. TeriEmbrey, please can you tell us about the other DYK rules - is the hook in article and reliably cited, does it meet minimum prose and age rules, is the article correctly cited? Nomader, please can you let us know with the dyk again logo when you have made the changes you mention above? Thanks. Baldy Bill (sharpen the razor|see my reflection) 19:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Hey Baldy, sorry about the delay, I do Wikipedia in some pretty heavy spurts. I've looked at the references and really, that's the most neutral hook I could do for that particular part of the establishment's history. Some alternatives below:
    • I like the second one of these the best, honestly. All three possible hooks should check out with the sources as well. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help speed this along. Nomader (talk) 00:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
  • New reviewer needed; TeriEmbrey's has not been back in three weeks, so someone else should take over and redo from the beginning, as basics like those noted by Baldy Bill above were not checked. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:43, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Another partial review here. Article is long enough and new enough. The ALT1 hook is OK, but the hook fact for ALT2 doesn't check out. (The establishment's owner is listed in the GQ article, but the article doesn't say it's because he owned this restaurant. I struck through the part of the hook that isn't supported.) Now I'll try to finish the rest of the review. --Orlady (talk) 23:56, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Finishing my review. I didn't find copyvio issues. I did make some revisions to the article to resolve some things that didn't match what I found in the sources and/or that I thought could be expressed more effectively. Although I indicated above that ALT1 is OK, I think the original hook is far more interesting (and I find that it is supported by cited sources), so I suggest the following toned-down version of it:
  • ALT3 ... that controversy arose after a ping pong table was set up on the sidewalk in front of the restaurant Comet Ping Pong?
It looks like a QPQ review is needed still. Also, if there's a desire to use the ALT3 hook, someone else will need to review it. --Orlady (talk) 05:04, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
With the ALT2 version: yeah, my bad on that one. I looked at the source again, looks like I just simply inferred what I thought got him onto the list instead of what the source actually said. My mistake. And oh crap, QPQ! Sorry, it's been so long since I did one of these that I totally forgot. I'll make sure to do one today and I'll let you know once I've done it. I definitely like the suggested toned-down hook as well, that controversy was the reason I decided to write the article in the first place. Thanks for the help and sorry about the issues. Nomader (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
  • ALT3 checks out - on format, length, present in article and directly cited to Washington Post. And quite eye catching too. Please strike the other hooks Orlady or Nomader if you are happy for it to run with that one. Just the QPQ to go... Baldy Bill (sharpen the razor|see my reflection) 17:54, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Still waiting on a QPQ nom... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:07, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
  • It has been over three weeks since the nominator last edited on Wikipedia (the post about doing a QPQ "today"). Under the circumstances, I don't feel this nomination can remain open any longer; closing as having failed to meet a key DYK requirement. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:19, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Comet_Ping_Pong&oldid=584360674"