Template:Did you know nominations/Jackson Barnett No. 11 Oil Well
- 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 Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 15:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Jackson Barnett No. 11 Oil Well edit
- ... that the proceeds from the Jackson Barnett No. 11 Oil Well made Jackson Barnett (pictured, with wife Anna) "the world's richest Indian"?
- Reviewed: Brooks Mountain
Created by Acroterion (talk). Self nominated at 21:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC).
- Looks good, but can you change it to Native Indian, I was thinking Indian as most would I'm sure.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- Remember that this was the United States in 1920s, and that as far as most people who knew of Jackson Barnett were concerned, the "Native Americans" were the Pilgrims, and the aboriginal people of North America were Indians. The treatment of Jackson Barnett was a scandal even in the 1920s, but it typified much of the worst behavior or the time, regarding native Americans as savages and pagans. (Parenthetical note: I'm convinced that Barnett's story was an inspiration for the Beverly Hillbillies, but alas, I can find no source). Since the description arose in the 1920s, I'd be reluctant to introduce an anachronism into the quote, but I agree that most readers in 2013 would read "Indian" as South Asian. Perhaps I could link Muscogee people in the quote? By the way, I expanded Jackson Barnett 5x (it was one line when I started, so it wasn't hard), so I was thinking of making it a double DYK. Acroterion (talk) 11:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- Here's an alternate hook, with the double DYK and a piped link: (ALT 1) ... that the proceeds from the Jackson Barnett No. 11 Oil Well made Jackson Barnett (pictured, with wife Anna) "the world's richest Indian"? Acroterion (talk) 12:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- Looks good, but can you change it to Native Indian, I was thinking Indian as most would I'm sure.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 11:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes back then, but in 2013 on the world stage which is wikipedia I think maybe the majority of the people would take "world's richest Indian" as from India. I'd put [Native] in brackets but the link I suppose would be better than nothing.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- Well, the quote is from back then. That being said, here's another alternate hook, with the double DYK and a piped link, and square brackets to set the modern term apart: (ALT 2) ... that the proceeds from the Jackson Barnett No. 11 Oil Well made Jackson Barnett (pictured, with wife Anna) "the world's richest [native American] Indian"? An alternative is to simply drop the pretense of a quote and just describe him in paraphrase as the world's richest native American, which I gather is your preference, though it loses some of its period flavor. Acroterion (talk) 16:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
One thing. The article says known as the world's richest Indian it doesn't say was, unless you can confirm he was rather than it being just a reputation, I'd tweak the hook slightly again.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC) ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- You're right, there's no way to check if he really was, and if we remove the quotes it's a more direct assertion of fact. (ALT 3) ... that the proceeds from the Jackson Barnett No. 11 Oil Well led Jackson Barnett (pictured, with wife Anna) to be described as the world's richest native American? Acroterion (talk) 12:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
ALT3 approved. Article new enough, long enough, and adequately cited. Hook short enough, interesting enough, and also cited. Article appears to be neutral and free of copyright violations and plagiarism. Cheers! ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 13:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the input and review: did you look at Jackson Barnett too, since I've bolded it in the hook (it uses the same source)? Acroterion (talk) 13:18, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Looks fine, yes.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the follow-up and tidying the quotes. Acroterion (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)