Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Sri Temasek

< Template:Did you know nominations
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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:02, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Sri Temasek edit

(
)

Sri Temasek

  • Reviewed: Not a self-nomination

Improved to Good Article status by Jacklee (talk), Hildanknight (talk). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 11:42, 20 June 2014 (UTC).

  • If the article is selected, please give credit to primary contributor Jacklee, as I only nominated the article and added two references. To be honest, I feel the hook is not interesting enough. --Hildanknight (talk) 15:32, 20 June 2014 (UTC)i
  • Added credit to the primary contributor. Although these contributions date from 2008, little extra was needed to bring the article to GA in 2014. Oceanh (talk) 17:37, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Struck original hook, deemed insufficiently interesting by person who took it to GA status. New ALT hook needed if this is to be fully reviewed. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • How about the fact that, although it is the official residence of the Prime Minister, none of the Prime Ministers have actually lived there? --Hildanknight (talk) 02:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. Here is a suggestion for an alternative hook:

  • ALT1: ... that Sri Temasek (pictured) is designated as the official residence of the Prime Minister of Singapore, though none of the past or present holders of the post have lived there with their family?

Oceanh (talk) 02:59, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

To Hildanknight: Did not see your post before I saved my suggestion, which is essentially similar to your proposal — thank you, maybe your wording is better. Oceanh (talk) 03:18, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Full review needed. In addition, here's Hildanknight's version of the hook written out as a proper ALT, for consideration by the reviewer:

EEng (talk) 02:51, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

  • New enough (GA 19 June, nom 20 June) and long enough. Hook image is free and appears in article; the other article image is free also. QPQ not required. Article text is objective, neutral, and fully referenced. No disambig links found. I have struck ALT1 in response to comment by its author and because ALT2 supersedes it. I have corrected the grammar of ALT2. The noun "none", meaning "not one", is singular therefore the verb must be "has", not "have", in Standard English. ALTs 2 and 3 are sourced in offline citation #7, accepted AGF. The accessible external links were checked for sources of possible copyvio and close paraphrasing, but none found. Issue: Citations #3, #9, #10, #11 and the first link in the External Links section are deadlinks. When the above deadlink issue has been resolved, this nom should be OK. --Storye book (talk) 09:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing at the deadlinks. These references seem to have been added (and accessed) in 2008, that is more than five years ago, and indicates the instability of weblinks in the long term. The Oxford Dictionary now seems to be a subscription service, and this (ref 3) should either be marked as such by someone who has subscription, or better be replaced by a book reference, which is more stable. (I have another dictionary with similar but still different description of the word cynosure; or I could probably find the book in a library at some occation). The dead external link can simply be removed. References 9, 10 and 11 are used to document facts in the article, and are therefore important. Maybe @Hildanknight, who brought the article to GA, can help (pinging in case you didn't already notice the discussion)? Oceanh (talk) 09:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
Pinging Hildanknight and Oceanh to see if anything is being done on this. (Storye book, this will probably be long gone by the time you get back but "none" is interchangeably singular and plural, so whatever person of the verb sounds best is fine. Susie Dent told me.) Belle (talk) 15:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Pinging Jacklee too. If there's no action by Monday, I'll close this nomination as abandoned, uncared for and forgotten. Pauvre, pauvre. Belle (talk) 11:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello! Got your ping. Well, I fixed footnotes 9 and 10 by adding archive URLs (as regards footnote 9, the problem seems to be that the Istana website as a whole is down). Found an updated URL for footnote 11, which can't be archived due to a no-cache tag. I don't think footnote 3 needs changing or updating as it isn't wrong to cite a website behind a paywall. If there's some way of indicating that the site is paywalled, please advise. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 17:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Passing on the basis of Storye book's earlier review and the corrected problems. Either ALT2 or ALT3 is fine (I like ALT3 for a quirky and to throw a bone to EEng after he's put the effort in) Belle (talk) 13:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I prefer ALT2. I think ALT3 is a bit obscure. But I'll leave the decision to the closing DYK volunteer. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 17:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
ALT3 is supposed to be obscure. That's what makes it hooky. EEng (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Oooh. Good idea. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 19:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Sri_Temasek&oldid=620557155"