Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Fannie Lou Hamer

< 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 Yoninah (talk) 23:13, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Fannie Lou Hamer edit

(
)
Hamer at the DNC in August 1964
Hamer at the DNC in August 1964
  • Reviewed: N/A
  • Comment: It would be fantastic if we could get this placed into the queue ahead a bit, as it is Black History Month and she is one incredible black woman. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 04:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Improved to Good Article status by Coffee (talk), A21sauce (talk), and Fishlandia (talk). Nominated by Coffee (talk) at 04:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC).

  • COMMENT: I would love to see this one used before the end of the month, but do not know enough about Mississippi civil rights history to review the article as part of the DYK process. I will suggest rewording ALT1 to ALT1a and an ALT3. I defer to Coffee to accept these suggestions or not. David notMD (talk) 11:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Coffee, I am sorry for pinging you, but I invite you to have your input in this thread: ([1]). Currently the DYK rule states that 1. e. Articles that have featured (bold link) previously on DYK, or in a blurb on the main page's In the news, or On this day sections are ineligible (WP:DYKRULES). According to this rule, this DYK nomination is ineligible ([2]). Personally, I think this current rule make very little sense with Good Article nominations. I'd like to see this article on the Main Page. Regards, Alex Shih (talk) 17:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
    • @Alex Shih: My understanding was if it had been listed in ITN, DYK, or OTD as a blurb before, which this hasn't. Her article is only featured in OTD as a death, so I'm not sure that 1.e. applies here. I hope we can please get a approval on this nomination. What about our old use of WP:IAR here? It seems like this should definitely be on the DYK's main page section to me. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 03:59, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
      • @Alex Shih: Per 1.e: (Articles linked at ITN or OTD not in bold, including the recent deaths section, are still eligible.) ... her article is only listed as a death... so this should still be eligible correct? — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 04:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
I would like to weigh in on this discussion. The article did appear on OTD but the question should be if it appeared as a bolded item. See [[3]]. On March 14, 2017, Admiral John Byng is bolded and would not be DYK compliant. Battle of Minorca, in the same entry, is not bolded and would be a DYK compliant, assuming it met other requirements. Fannie Lou Hamer and Tony Benn have been bolded but perhaps improperly bolded. They do not have any hook or similar, merely a name in a list of 3 people who died. Since this is not completely clear, we must determine whether the DYK rules are inclusive or exclusive. Namely, is it "everything which is not forbidden is allowed" (English law) or "everything which is not allowed is forbidden". (certainly, it is not "everything which is not forbidden is compulsory" which is dictatorship). Under the English law principle, OTD listing only as a death would be permitted as a DYK. CONCLUSION: DYK nomination should proceed. Vanguard10 (talk) 05:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a reviewer? If not, I can proceed. Alex, are you reviewing this? Vanguard10 (talk) 05:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Vanguard10, fantastic analogy. My concern was that Fannie Lou Hamer appeared as a bolded item, which falls into the grey area, but your rationale is very convincing. Please proceed with reviewing if possible, thank you! Alex Shih (talk) 05:35, 16 February 2018 (UTC)


General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Review is incomplete - please fill in the "status" field Review in progress. May not appear for 20 hours.Vanguard10 (talk) 06:16, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

  • I fixed the only close paraphrasing issue I could find (the rest are caused by quotes, which I reduced originally for it to pass GA), @Vanguard10: I think it should be good to go now. Please let me know if there are any other issues! — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 19:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: nominator is requested to pick a hook. If not done, I will pick one. Recommend not picking hook ALT2 unless better documented. Even though noted in one citation, there is no evidence presented that the impromptu press conference did not have a valid reason, such as major news or event. Also recommend revised caption for photo. Although photo credit says it is from the 1964 DNC, the background looks like a kitchen, not a convention center. Consider Hamer speaking in 1964. For the article and not for DYK, recommend looking at citation 48, used about her death. It cites cancer. Breast cancer is cited in Women's History Encyclopedia. There is no mention of complications of hypertension. My guess is that she probably had complications of hypertension but died of breast cancer. Vanguard10 (talk) 03:53, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you! I recommend going with the first hook aka "ALT0". — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 04:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Fannie_Lou_Hamer&oldid=1018853945"