Template:Did you know nominations/Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights
- 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) 21:50, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights edit
- ... that the Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights moved from Arkansas to Massachusetts when its director changed?
- ALT1:... that the Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights had only two directors in its 25 years of existence?
- ALT2:... that the Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights is most known for its book award?
Created by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 21:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC).
The article is new enough and long enough. I didn't find any plagiarism, and the only hits I found were repeats of the names of subjects. QPQ has been done, and the hook facts are verified in their respective sources. Unfortunately, I don't find any of the three hooks to be that interesting to a broad audience; ALT0 and ALT1 are not exactly unusual, and to be honest, neither is ALT2. It's really common for groups to be better known for their awards than their actual work (this is especially the case in entertainment, like say the Academy Awards). Is there something else that could be suggested here? The only thing I could think of based on the article is how it was unclear who their members or funders were, although I'm not sure if that's a common practice among non-profit organizations. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review. I agree, the hooks are not scintillating, and usually with DYK I do better in that regard. But I can't make a hook saying that it was unclear who the center's members or funders were, because it must have been clear to someone – the two directors, if no one else – it's that I haven't been able to track it down. If this were a newspaper I would try contacting the first director, who is still alive, to see what the deal was and fill in a few gaps. But if I do that here, I'll just get bludgeoned with complaints about OR. So as it stands, I think ALT2 is about the best that can be gone with. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- Another suggestion is to ditch ALT2, but write another hook that revolves around the award and explaining how the award was considered a big deal when it was still around. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review. I agree, the hooks are not scintillating, and usually with DYK I do better in that regard. But I can't make a hook saying that it was unclear who the center's members or funders were, because it must have been clear to someone – the two directors, if no one else – it's that I haven't been able to track it down. If this were a newspaper I would try contacting the first director, who is still alive, to see what the deal was and fill in a few gaps. But if I do that here, I'll just get bludgeoned with complaints about OR. So as it stands, I think ALT2 is about the best that can be gone with. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- That would get more into the territory of Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book Award, another article I created. But I decided not to nominate that one for DYK, because I never made a list of all the winners (a lot of effort, and I didn't think I could source most of the ones from earlier years), nor did I come up with a complete list of winning authors who have WP articles (the existing list of those is mostly taken from the Gustavus Myers, from which I split some material out). Wasted Time R (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that's the only way forward I can see right now. There isn't anything else that seems hook-worthy in the article, so if you don't think that could be an option, this nomination may have to be marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- That would get more into the territory of Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book Award, another article I created. But I decided not to nominate that one for DYK, because I never made a list of all the winners (a lot of effort, and I didn't think I could source most of the ones from earlier years), nor did I come up with a complete list of winning authors who have WP articles (the existing list of those is mostly taken from the Gustavus Myers, from which I split some material out). Wasted Time R (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
- I've found and added something to the article, which provides:
- ALT3: ... that two years before it closed due to lack of funds, the Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights put out the "Sheroes Womyn Warriors Wall Calendar" to raise money?
- If nothing else those two words will attract some attention. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
- I've found and added something to the article, which provides:
Thanks for the expansion. I can't access either source for the hook fact (one is offline, the other is paywalled) so I will accept the content in good faith. The hook isn't the best and it isn't that spectacular, but it seems to be the best option moving forward given the circumstances. Approving ALT3. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:29, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
