Template:Did you know nominations/Year 24 Group
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 12:15, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Year 24 Group
- ... that prior to the arrival of the Year 24 Group, most girls' comics in Japan were written by men? Source: "La bande dessinée japonaise pour filles et pour femmes"
- ALT1:... that Japanese girls' comics saw a period of innovation and development in the 1970s as a result of the influence of the Year 24 Group? Source: "Shojo Manga! Girls' Comics! A Mirror of Girls' Dreams
- ALT2:... that Japanese girls' comics in the 1970s expanded to incorporate adventure fiction, horror, fantasy, and same-sex romance as a result of the influence of the Year 24 Group? Source: "Shojo Manga! Girls' Comics! A Mirror of Girls' Dreams
- ALT3:... that the impact of the Year 24 Group has been alternately compared to the discovery of interiority in early Meiji fiction and the rise of New Wave cinema? Source: "The Revolution in 1970s Shōjo Manga"
- Reviewed: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
- Comment: Note that Wikipedia:Prosesize will not show a 5x expansion because it doesn't count the indented text under "Members" as "readable prose".
5x expanded by Morgan695 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC).
The DYK supplementary guidelines state, "Prosesize.js is the preferred counting method, and usually carries the most weight at DYK, because it counts only the prose as defined by Did You Know rules, thus avoiding mistakes and providing an impartial settlement of disputed counting." I'm going to ignore that rule when it comes to that because it's nonsense when I can tell that those sentences are new content. In that case, the article has been expanded enough and in time. I assume good faith on the references that I can't read. A QPQ has been completed. I prefer the first hook as the most interesting and it is directly cited. This is ready. SL93 (talk) 01:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
