Template:Did you know nominations/Robin Schreiber

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 18:47, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Robin Schreiber

  • ... that Stephen Curry danced with viral sensation Robin Schreiber during the 2017 NBA All-Star Weekend, and he later wore shoes featuring designs in her honor? Source: "Smooth dance moves, hip hand jives and an eye-popping Golden State Warriors holiday sweater whirled a Redwood City mom into an international viral sensation."(The Daily Journal) "Dance Cam Mom’s real name is Robin Schreiber, and she’s down at the 2017 NBA All-Star Weekend this year to take part in some video for the festivities. It looks like she’s having a blast already as she’s already challenged one player to a dance-off: Stephen Curry." (Pro Basketball Talk) "Stephen Curry practiced on Tuesday in a new pair of Under Armour Curry 4s, featuring designs that honor the dancing Golden State Warriors superfan and her festive holiday sweater."(Sporting News)

5x expanded by Bagumba (talk). Self-nominated at 16:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC).

  • 5x expansion, new enough, long enough, QPQ donated, hook cited. passes earwig. --evrik (talk) 01:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Baguma: Also a question, but is "viral sensation" suitable encyclopedic wording and not one of the words to avoid? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
@Bagumba: Re-ping. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5:Thanks for the feedback. The source I cited above in the nom used viral sensation, and there's enough sources that say she went viral, which is in the dictionary. Are you not convinced that sources back this, or are just uncomfortable with the wording? Do you have an alternative suggestion? Regards.—Bagumba (talk) 02:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Really more of the latter, as I feel that the wording may count as a peacock term even if it's used in sources. Maybe just drop the wording altogether from the hook? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I think that's much better and is still meets the original review. Rest of the review per Evrik; special occcasion request has been noted. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:27, 15 February 2021 (UTC)