Template:Did you know nominations/St. Elmo (1914 film)

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 Allen3 ^talk 12:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

St. Elmo (1914 film)

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the 1914 film St. Elmo, an adaptation of a best-selling novel by Augusta Jane Evans, broke box-office records?

• Reviewed: demob suit (in progress)

Created by Squeamish Ossifrage (talk). Self nominated at 23:00, 5 January 2015 (UTC).

• Comment (I will not make a review). I don't think that the hook is interesting. There are a lot of movies now that broke box-office records. --Carlojoseph14 (talk) 09:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

• Meh. Well, other hooks are possible, too, after all. Perhaps:

• ALT1: ... that the 1914 silent St. Elmo was the first feature film based on Augusta Jane Evans best-selling novel of the same name?
• ALT2: ... that the 1914 silent film St. Elmo was financially successful despite a Variety review calling it less valuable than unused film?

Fundamentally, I do realize that lost films from the 1910s aren't extraordinarily exciting for much of the readership. But I refuse to believe that getting a hook for this is hopeless. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:29, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK checklist template

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: A check for copyvio and paraphrase did disclose that the phrase "Balboa was not a film distributor," is duplicated in another WP article by same editor; of course this is not problematic. Given that, this article is GTG with any hook. I should think that ALT2 would draw most page views. I realize that this hook checks out in edit view as being close to 200 character limit, but in reader view is only 129 characters.Georgejdorner (talk) 17:35, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

• ALT3 ... that a review of St. Elmo (1914) said its makers "might have got a little profit out of the raw [film] by not ruining it through putting St. Elmo on it"? EEng (talk) 03:54, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

• For my part, I'd be entirely satisfied with either ALT2 or ALT3, depending on whether the quote or the paraphrased sentiment is preferred. By means of additional comment, this article is now also eligible for DYK by virtue of its GA sticker. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 04:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)