Template:Did you know nominations/The People's Library
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 PumpkinSky talk 18:13, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The People's Library[edit]
( )
- ... that the People's Library was formed when an abandoned cardboard box full of books was discovered in Zuccotti Park?
Created/expanded by CMBJ (talk). Self nom at 11:42, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Hook comes from article, but citation is to what looks like a blog, not counted as a reliable source. Hook is short enough and interesting. Article is new and big enough. One whole section uncited. Article may not be NPOV. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:58, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
- Citation for hook has been substantiated with a conventional source. Unsourced section now contains proper references. A request for specific objections from the editor who prepended a NPOV tag remains unanswered as of present. — C M B J 09:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The new citation looks more reliable, but it does not support the statement in the hook, having nothing to say about the start. The last section now has a surfeit of citations. So all that is left is the hook reliable citation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
- Whoops! I was reading an older article from the same author and thought they were the same one. Check again now. — C M B J 09:55, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
The hook reference is now fixed and supports the content. That only leaves the NPOV tagging. User:Arzel claimed that "The article reads like communist propaganda". Hopefully the sourcing or misrepresentation issue is already addressed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:07, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
- Whoops! I was reading an older article from the same author and thought they were the same one. Check again now. — C M B J 09:55, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
- Citation for hook has been substantiated with a conventional source. Unsourced section now contains proper references. A request for specific objections from the editor who prepended a NPOV tag remains unanswered as of present. — C M B J 09:15, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
