Template:Did you know nominations/Robert Rinder
- 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) 06:17, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Robert Rinder
[edit]... that Judge Rinder has been called the British Judge Judy?
- ALT1:
... that TV judge, Judge Rinder is a practicing criminal barrister and not a civil judge? - Reviewed: Marlowe Memorial
- ALT1:
5x expanded by The C of E (talk) and Ferma (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 07:40, 8 September 2016 (UTC).
• 
No issues found with article, ready for human review.
- ✓ This biographical article has been expanded from 838 chars to 4194 chars since 13:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC), a 5.00-fold expansion
- ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 4194 characters
- ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
- Note that this is a biographical article about a living person. All claims must be cited to a reliable source.
- ✓ This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
- ✓ A copyright violation is unlikely according to automated metrics (16.7% confidence; confirm)
- Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
• No overall issues detected
- ✓ The hook ALT0 is an appropriate length at 53 characters
- ✓ The hook ALT1 is an appropriate length at 71 characters
- ✓ The C of E has more than 5 DYK credits. A QPQ review of Template:Did you know nominations/Marlowe Memorial was performed for this nomination.
Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This is not a substitute for a human review. Please report any issues with the bot. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 22:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure about the main hook – although they’re difficult to distinguish the source seems to apply the "British Judge Judy" description to the show rather than the person. I found ALT1 more interesting and it is clearly supported by the source, although perhaps slightly confusing to people who don't know that it refers to a TV judge – or was it the intention that people would have to check the article to find out why he is referred to as a judge when he isn't one? If not perhaps reword it to something along the lines of "that TV judge Robert Rinder is a practicing criminal barrister and not a civil judge?"
- Otherwise, length and 5x expansion are fine, hooks meet length and format requirements, article is cited with no close paraphrasing issues (although the two citations to his CV should be replaced or backed up with independent sources if possible), QPQ done. January (talk) 16:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- @January: Yes, ALT1 was intended as to draw people in to find out why the Judge isn't a judge. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- I've thought about this some more, I think the main hook would have been OK if Judge Rinder had been the nominated article, but as it is Rinder's bio it should be cited that he directly has been called the "British Judge Judy". Re ALT1, I'm not saying I'd refuse to approve it as is but I found his being a reality TV judge when he isn't a real judge interesting enough that it didn't need the hook made more cryptic. January (talk) 14:13, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- @January: I have made the change for ALT1. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:48, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I've thought about this some more, I think the main hook would have been OK if Judge Rinder had been the nominated article, but as it is Rinder's bio it should be cited that he directly has been called the "British Judge Judy". Re ALT1, I'm not saying I'd refuse to approve it as is but I found his being a reality TV judge when he isn't a real judge interesting enough that it didn't need the hook made more cryptic. January (talk) 14:13, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- ALT2: ... that Judge Rinder isn't a judge? EEng 21:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think we could put that forward as an April Fool's Day hook. @The C of E: would you be OK with holding this until next April Fools Day? (Appreciate it's quite a few months away). January (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- @January: I'm OK with that. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 18:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think we could put that forward as an April Fool's Day hook. @The C of E: would you be OK with holding this until next April Fools Day? (Appreciate it's quite a few months away). January (talk) 17:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- ALT2 is fine as a hook, however, the article says he is a judge, while later stating that he actually isn't, so that is a discrepancy that I think needs to be cleared up. Gatoclass (talk) 10:27, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- A bit of vandalism that got missed, the line should have said barrister but someone mucked around with it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:25, 14 March 2017 (UTC)