- 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 97198 (talk) 05:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Iatrophysics edit
- ... that ...? Source: "This article explains the concept of Iatrophysics, the use of mechanics to analyze anatomy. This was a key concept that changed the way medicine was viewed and studied. " (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT1:... that mechanical models of muscle contraction were fleshed out starting as early as the 17th century in the field of Iatrophysics? Source: "? " (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
Created/expanded by Yennyyang (talk). Self-nominated at 19:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- No hook created by submitter - Interesting: - No hook created by submitter
- Other problems: - No hook created by submitter
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
This is my first time using the DYK checklist template. The article was expanded almost 10x from the previous existing article. While the article looks good, at the time of the expansion, the nominator as Yoninah (talk · contribs) has stated, did not submit a hook. The hook statement of being cited, and interesting cannot be judged at this time until the submitter provides at least one hook. Therefore as of this review, the nomination should be placed on hold. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:43, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- @Yennyyang: please respond by providing a hook.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:44, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
- RightCowLeftCoast, I just discovered a hook placed in the middle of the source section of ALT1, so I've moved it into the main section of ALT1 and formatted it. The same incorrect placement was done for the original hook, but what's there is two sentences and not all that interesting. Can you take a look at ALT1 and see whether it does the job and is properly supported in the article? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: looking at the article as it stood on the date of nomination, the first paragraph of the "Iatrophysicists" section is unsourced.
- If the hooks are in the small writing, than ALT1 appears to be triple sourced, and the first hook "This article explains the concept of Iatrophysics, the use of mechanics to analyze anatomy. This was a key concept that changed the way medicine was viewed and studied." is not sourced.
Therefore upon second look, the article needs to be improved by Yennyyang (talk · contribs), which appears to be the case, but not yet enough to allow it to pass.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
The nominator has never responded here despite numerous pings here and on their talk page, and the class this was nominated for held its final meeting this past Friday. Marking for closure as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:59, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
