Template:Did you know nominations/Snark sailboat
- 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: rejected by BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 21:57, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Snark sailboat[edit]
- ... that in 1971 Snark sailboat could be mail ordered — for $88 along with a flap from a carton of Kool cigarettes — including delivery?
- Reviewed: Carbondale mine fire
@842U: Expansion is new enough, and easily long enough. Article is written okay, with no copyvio. Parts of the marketing section are unreferenced. Not sure that sailboatstogo.com is a reliable source. Hook is verified to a decent source though. I am not sure whether the second-person point of view should go in a hook. --Jakob (talk) 13:42, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
- Revised hook re second-person POV.842U (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
- Added images and citations to support co-branding marketing campaigns. Added citations (to support sales numbers and manufacturer estimate of sales. Added further inline citations. Holding this nomination... because??? 842U (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- Citations should be inline. And there is still an unreliable source. Additionally, fair-use images that are too large have been added into the article. If their sole purpose is as a citation, then they should be deleted, since an inline citation would do just as well. --Jakob (talk) 15:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- After all this... I'm losing interest. At first you weren't sure about the reliability of the source and now you are sure that it's not acceptable. You later wanted each paragraph to have a citation and then you wanted each sentence to have a citation. Now the fair use images, which support the article, are "too large." Seriously. I'm getting... well... I'm nolonger sure the work put into this article merit a DYK nomination -- or further participation. 842U (talk) 15:51, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- Citations should be inline. And there is still an unreliable source. Additionally, fair-use images that are too large have been added into the article. If their sole purpose is as a citation, then they should be deleted, since an inline citation would do just as well. --Jakob (talk) 15:15, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- Added images and citations to support co-branding marketing campaigns. Added citations (to support sales numbers and manufacturer estimate of sales. Added further inline citations. Holding this nomination... because??? 842U (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
- Revised hook re second-person POV.842U (talk) 21:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
