- 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 PFHLai (talk) 03:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Korean drama edit
- ... that Korean drama production companies spend roughly 55-65% of their whole budget on recruiting top stars for a series?
- ALT1:... that the filming schedule of a Korean drama is so tight actors often have to sleep in awkward places and positions on set, for which the industry has its own invented expression: "side-sleeping"?
- ALT2:... that an overwhelming majority of scriptwriters of Korean drama are women, while there are only a handful of female directors?
- Comment: Although not in 7 days, I needed more time, since the article was really in a very bad condition; but it was completely rewritten (see its old state), re-referenced and re-structured to solve the issues with the article.
5x expanded by Teemeah (talk). Self nominated at 13:06, 16 July 2014 (UTC).
Although a lot of effort has gone into completely rewriting this article I fear it does not meet the DYK criteria as the article was 20 kB before the expansion and is only 24 kB now. The only likely way for it to qualify for DYK will be if it is promoted to become a GA, then it will qualify by right. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
- Cwmhiraeth, It was completely rewritten from zero. Please compare the text to its previous state. This was not an expansion but a rewrite of an extremely poor quality article. It couldn't be made much longer even if you tried. This is an FA in huwiki. I feel that following rules by the letter is discriminating in a lot of cases. Or the community needs to expand the rules to include these cases, as well. This article is as new and as interesting as any other on this page, and all this is going to be decided by mere quantitative numbers only? What if I blanked the whole page and started anew? Teemeah 편지 (letter) 22:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
- Even if the state of the article on July 4th, when you had removed a large quantity of text, was taken as a start point, the article still does not nearly reach a fivefold expansion. If you feel aggrieved, you can open a discussion on the DYK talk page. I may sympathise with your point of view, but I am only applying the DYK rules. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:23, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
Teemeah, with established articles such as this that have a great deal of text before edits begin, making a 5x expansion not possible, Cwmhiraeth is right: the sole route available to you for DYK is for the article to become a Good Article (see WP:GAN for how to nominate your article). Once an article is listed as a GA, you'll have seven days to nominate it here. Blanking the article page is not an option; we would still count from the previously existing material. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:09, 26 July 2014 (UTC)- Please re-nominate after GA review. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 03:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
