Template:Did you know nominations/campaign announcement
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:15, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Presidential campaign announcements in the United States[edit]
.jpg)
Michelle Bachmann U.S. presidential announcement
- ... that a U.S. presidential candidate making a campaign announcement is said to "throw one's hat in the ring", after a boxing metaphor popularized by the Theodore Roosevelt 1912 presidential campaign? Source
- ALT1:... that U.S. presidential frontrunners have less incentive for an early campaign announcement? Source Source]"
Created by Pharos (talk). Self-nominated at 17:05, 22 January 2019 (UTC).
Some problems: 1) the article deals exclusively with US Presidential campaigns but does not say so in the lead. I don't think the term is used elsewhere in the world (it's not really relevant in many Westminster-style constitutions) so a re-title is probably best. 2) The one-line paras (one without a ref) should be merged. 3) In the ALT hook - "less" than who or what? I suppose less-likely contenders but this threw me somewhat.
- Main hook checks out, though a stronger source would be nice. New, long, and neutral enough. Johnbod (talk) 21:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
- Not a review but a comment, but campaign announcements do exist in other countries with a presidential style of government. At the very least, they're a thing in the Philippines, though it's not exactly universal. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Pharos: Have you been able to address the concerns? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:29, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Pharos: This is your final ping; if you are unable to respond by the 25th, I will mark this for closure as abandoned. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:19, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Unfortunately, as it appears that the article concerns have not been addressed (indeed, the nominator has not edited the article since the 23rd, before the review), and the nominator has been unable to respond on this page despite being actively editing and numerous pings, it is with regret that this nomination is marked for closure as stale. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:18, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Now moved to Presidential campaign announcements in the United States. Hooks adjusted, & my other points above dealt with (I've decided the ALT1 hook is ok in fact). New review needed - I'll deal with if Pharos still awol. Johnbod (talk) 13:22, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the edits Johnbod. I've taken the liberty of adding you as a co-nominator. I'm willing to do the rest of the review for you, but I'd really want to hear from Pharos first. If they don't respond in about a week, I'll complete the review. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. Johnbod (talk) 03:32, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Pharos still has not responded to any of the pings or talk page messages, unfortunately. @Narutolovehinata5: Do you want to go ahead and complete the review?--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 18:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. Johnbod (talk) 03:32, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the edits Johnbod. I've taken the liberty of adding you as a co-nominator. I'm willing to do the rest of the review for you, but I'd really want to hear from Pharos first. If they don't respond in about a week, I'll complete the review. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:55, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks, here's the full review. The article was new enough at the time of the nomination, it is of an appropriate length and is adequately sourced (well almost, but we'll get to that later). Pharos has only three prior DYK credits so a QPQ is not required. I wasn't able to find any close paraphrasing. The article is neutral and while not comprehensive, gives a good overview of the topic (especially now that the article has been limited to the US). Just two issues with the article: the date regarding Delaney uses DD-MM-YYYY even though all the references in the article use MM-DD-YYYY in their respective templates, and the last sentence of the first paragraph (the part about exploratory committees) lacks a citation. @Pharos and Johnbod: Can you address these issues first? Also, an optional suggestion: maybe there could be a short paragraph on how launching exploratory committees can lead to campaign announcements? Since that's what tends to happen in real life, and that single sentence is too short for such an important topic. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:30, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: The MDY thing was an easy fix, so done. I'll leave others to deal with the rest.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:45, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
@Pharos: This is the final ping you will receive for this nomination. If you do not respond or address the issues in three days, I will mark this nomination for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- Also pinging Johnbod, who offered to deal with the issues raised in the review, since Pharos has not been around for a while. I'd like to point out that an alternately formatted date should not prevent passage here, though the citation mentioned does need to be supplied. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:59, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- Does it? it meets the DYK criteria as it is. The date is fixed now I think. Johnbod (talk) 03:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I've added one anyway. So I think we are ready to go. Johnbod (talk) 03:45, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Johnbod: Thanks for the new reference. However, you added a bare URL reference, which is discouraged on DYK. Please format it with a citation template (like cite web), thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:12, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- I have expanded it, but please note is was NOT what is properly called a bare URL, and there is absolutely NO requirement, on DYK or anywhere else, to use citation templates - I never do. Reviewers should restrict themselves to what the DYK criteria & rules actually say, and not use the review process to try and impose their personal preferences. Johnbod (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Johnbod: Please read WP:DYKSG#D3. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- Indeed - it wasn't one of those, and WP:DYKSG#D3 does not mention templates at all! Johnbod (talk) 02:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Johnbod: Please read WP:DYKSG#D3. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- I have expanded it, but please note is was NOT what is properly called a bare URL, and there is absolutely NO requirement, on DYK or anywhere else, to use citation templates - I never do. Reviewers should restrict themselves to what the DYK criteria & rules actually say, and not use the review process to try and impose their personal preferences. Johnbod (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Johnbod: Thanks for the new reference. However, you added a bare URL reference, which is discouraged on DYK. Please format it with a citation template (like cite web), thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:12, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- Well, I've added one anyway. So I think we are ready to go. Johnbod (talk) 03:45, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
- Does it? it meets the DYK criteria as it is. The date is fixed now I think. Johnbod (talk) 03:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
The sourcing thing was the last remaining issue, so I am now approving this. The template is off though: it uses DMY instead of MDY like the rest of the article, but it's a minor issue and shouldn't prevent this from passing. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- That was an easy fix. :-)--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 03:40, 15 March 2019 (UTC)