Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Night of the Scarecrow

< Template:Did you know nominations
The following discussion 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 15:38, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Night of the Scarecrow edit

(
)

5x expanded by SL93 (talk). Self nominated at 18:04, 28 July 2013 (UTC).

  • DYKcheck says that this hasn't been 5x expanded, but it has. SL93 (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I have checked both with and without DYKcheck and the article has not been 5x expanded. On 21 April 2013‎ (the last time it was edited before today) it stood at 2,122 bytes; It now stands at 5,239 bytes. It would need to reach 10,610 to be 5x expanded. --Rushton2010 (talk) 20:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
  • That isn't true. It was 213 characters before expansion. It isn't about bytes. SL93 (talk) 20:25, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Former redirects, stubs, and other articles in which the prose portion has been expanded fivefold or more within the past five days are also acceptable as "new" articles. The content with which the article has been expanded must be new content, not text copied from other articles. The length of both the old and new versions of the article is calculated based on prose character count, not word count. Prose character count excludes wiki markup, templates, lists, tables, and references; it is calculated using User:Dr pda/prosesize.js or a similar extension." SL93 (talk) 20:35, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
  • TL;DR.... Had enough submissions for this nonsense declined on near identical lines and have done plenty of reviews. DYKcheck says no; long may DYKcheck reign --Rushton2010 (talk) 20:38, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
DYKcheck can be wrong. It doesn't base it on right before expansion. It bases it on the longest article, no matter when it was. That is why you need to check manually. SL93 (talk) 20:39, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
As I already said.... If you insist... --Rushton2010 (talk) 20:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm not insisting it. It is true. It was 213 characters before expansion. An exact 5x expansion would be 1,065 characters. It is now 2,119 characters. SL93 (talk) 20:45, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict × 2)Actually, it is correct to base it on longest article whenever, as that is what expansion is measured from to avoid gaming, but in this case that longest article doesn't count as part of it was a copyvio.--Gilderien Chat|Contributions 20:47, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Now that there has been much useless discussion, this needs an actual review. SL93 (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

  • Supplementary_guidelines A4 "A4: Fivefold expansion is calculated from the previously existing article, no matter how bad it was (copyvios are an exception)"
  • DYK Check 213 characters of readable prose on April 21, 2013 after Dougweller removed copyvio synopsis. This was the last edit before SL93 began expanding on July 28.
  • Current readable prose is 2119 characters
  • Eagwig @ Toolserver says no current copyvio

So far, so good. But SL93, I checked the online sourcing for the hook, and it doesn't make that comparison with the other movie. It just gives a link to two other movies. Is it possible you used the wrong source on that sentence? — Maile (talk) 21:43, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I have that source anymore, it more than likely was unreliable. The Blu-ray.com source mentions the word similar, but only as a similar title that happens to also be a scarecrow movie. Give me a moment. SL93 (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Never mind - here is the quote - "Without spoiling too much of the gory fun that's in store, there are of course murders galore (including one that's quite similar to one in Dark Night of the Scarecrow), as well as some pretty frightening maimings, all at the hands of a possessed scarecrow who has a particular obsession with something he (it?) thinks is in the possession of the Goodman family." So to make it better, how about saying
I am so embarrassed all of a sudden. It wasn't that the source didn't reference as it should. It's because I had "NoScript" on, and it didn't show up on my monitor. Please accept my apologies for that boo-boo. — Maile (talk) 22:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
This is good 2 go on both the original hook, and ALT1, promoter's choice. — Maile (talk) 22:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Night_of_the_Scarecrow&oldid=829239613"