Template:Did you know nominations/Lixia Zhang
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lixia Zhang
[edit]- ... that Lixia Zhang coined the term "middlebox"?
- Reviewed: Acropora abrolhosensis
Created by David Eppstein (talk). Self-nominated at 07:15, 15 June 2015 (UTC).
At 2026 characters of readable prose the article is long enough, created June 15 and nominated on June 16, so new enough. Article is interesting (subject well worthy of an article, well done!) is well sourced with inline citations and neutral in tone. No copyvio detected, QPQ ok, hook well cited, snappy and admirably short. Good to go! w.carter-Talk 17:11, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
The lead does not support the information presented in the rest of the article. Nothing is said in the body of the article about middleboxes. The lead calls her a "founder" of the Internet Engineering Task Force but the article just describes her as a "participant" at the first meeting. An infobox would be nice. Yoninah (talk) 09:26, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Since it is a short article, my impression was that the first part is not a lead per se, but rather the first section. If the article needs a lead, the first section should be moved down to the rest of the main text and a new lead should be created. Further, being a participant at a first meeting usually implies that the person is also one of the founders. If the exact wording is requested, that can be found at another source. w.carter-Talk 09:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: DYK has many rules listed in WP:DYK and WP:DYKSG so probably I missed this one in reading them quickly. Can you point to where in these rules it says that stating things in the first paragraph without echoing the same statement later for the benefit those who missed it the first time is disallowed? In this instance, it might make sense to add an expanded description of Zhang's contribution to middleboxes in the contributions section, but in general if something would just be the same sentence again I don't see the point in legalistic rules about not being allowed to say things at the start of the article that are not stated elsewhere. Certainly not for a start-class article, anyway. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:03, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- @W.carter: it may be a short article, but the fact that there are enough subheads to divide the first paragraph from the rest of the copy makes the first paragraph a lead. I wouldn't have said anything, except that the hook pulls out that one fact, and any reader who clicks on it will certainly want to read more than a repeat of "She coined the term middlebox". Really, all that was needed was some extra description under Contributions, which I went ahead and added. Restoring tick based on your review. Yoninah (talk) 21:24, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: Thank you for fixing the text. :) I was afraid to do any edits myself since I might then have broken some other DYK rule about editing an article I was reviewing. (I've had my fingers slapped before for being helpful.) I could only post my thoughts regarding your query here and hope that they would be noticed. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
