Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Joseph Forbes (educator)

< 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:45, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Joseph Forbes (educator) edit

(
)
  • ... that Joseph Forbes taught boxing champion Jack Dempsey in Colorado? Source: Grandpa Was a Polygamist by Paul Bailey
    • ALT1:... that citizens of American Fork, Utah celebrated Forbes day in celebration of Joseph Forbes's 54-year teaching career? Source: Grandpa Was a Polygamist by Paul Bailey
    • ALT2:... that after Joseph Forbes was arrested for illegal cohabitation, his first wife went to live in a different state to avoid a second arrest?Source: Grandpa Was a Polygamist by Paul Bailey
  • Reviewed: Nichika_Ōmori
  • Comment: I don't have exact quotes for the hooks, but I can find them again. The page was recently nominated for speedy deletion, which I contest! Please do not review until the deletion nomination is resolved.

Created by Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 22:23, 14 November 2018 (UTC).

  • This article has been deleted. So uncontroversial to fail and close this nomination. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I believe the speedy deletion was made in error, as the page is considerably different from the first version that was deleted. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:47, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • @Shirt58: where is the deletion discussion for this article, and is the newly created version sufficiently identical to the deleted version? Rachel Helps (BYU), if Shirt58 does not respond, consider taking this to WP:DRV. feminist (talk) 03:31, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Marking as "maybe" as the article creator is an experienced editor and the ineligibility of the nomination has been contested. feminist (talk) 03:33, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
@Rachel Helps (BYU) and Feminist: The WP:AFD was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Barlow Forbes. As always, please let me know if I can help in any way. Pete AU aka Shirt58 (talk) 10:39, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. If there is non-trivial difference between the version created by Rachel Helps (BYU) and the deleted version, the G4 deletion may be inappropriate (but as a non-admin, I can't judge). There are two possible approaches: the first is to restore the G4-deleted article to draft space, then take this to WP:DRV; the second is to restore the article in mainspace then immediately take it to WP:AFD. feminist (talk) 10:55, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
@Shirt58: is the G4-deleted version of Joseph Forbes (educator) substantially similar in content to Joseph Barlow Forbes? If not, would you mind undeleting it and placing it in draft space? c (talk) 10:26, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Yes, my argument is that the page did not qualify for speedy deletion, as the most recently deleted version was substantially different from the one covered under the original deletion discussion. I added several sources which I believe fulfill Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
Hello @Rachel Helps (BYU) and Feminist:, Simething odd is going on wirh ny computer keyboard, I;ll need to sort that out. In the mean time, 
deleted versions

My apologies fo the delay. Pete AU aka Shirt58 (talk) 09:15, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Based on the restored versions I'd say the G4 deletion was inappropriate. However, I agree that this is borderline for notability. Most of the coverage was from two books written by the subject's grandson. Rachel Helps (BYU), consider taking this to WP:DRV if you want this to be kept. feminist (talk) 11:04, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
I dunno about that. Shirt58 brought this to my attention as the closer of the AfD, and after looking at both versions, I don't think it really passes G4. It clearly started as an exact copy, and the meat of the new changes occurred over these diffs. I went through the new draft and removed all the sentences that were exact copies from the original, and that's mostly it. In my view, it's not enough to make it substantially different, especially when looking at the AfD. The new version clearly introduces new sources, which is enough to at least consider whether it should be overturned given the concerns at AfD, but I don't think the new sources or content push up against the notability issues. At any rate, I agree with Feminist that WP:DRV is the perfect venue for this if you want to contest the G4 Rachel Helps (BYU). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:17, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
@Amorymeltzer: Looking at this article's history again, what's interesting is that this was restored as a draft after AfD, expanded somewhat, accepted (by a blocked editor) at AfC, then speedy deleted. The best an admin could have done in this situation would have been to move this back to draft space and refer the article expander to DRV. This article should not have been mainspaced without a DRV discussion, unless GNG is so obvious as to not require discussion (which is the case with e.g. the Incel article, but not here). feminist (talk) 16:35, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments. I've created a deletion review (DRV) for the page, so feel free to comment there. I will comment here after the DRV. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 17:20, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
The speedy deletion was overturned, but it's possible there could be another nomination for deletion in the future. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 19:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
There hasn't been a nomination for deletion in the last week. I believe the page is ready for review. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 18:56, 12 December 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
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I would choose ALT0 since it's the most outstanding to me. ALT1 can be a backup. Good to go (assuming good faith with some sources)! VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 06:32, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi, I came by to promote this, but the article is an orphan. Please link it in at least one other Wikipedia article so it won't get an orphan tag. American Fork, Utah would be a logical choice. Yoninah (talk) 19:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Restoring tick per Vincent60030's review. (@Vincent60030: since the hook ref is online, we use the gray icon rather than the green.) Yoninah (talk) 21:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Returned from prep, as I feel ALT0 is misleading. To write it the way it should be written, that "future boxing champion Jack Dempsey was a student of Joseph Forbes", takes something away from Forbes, as if his notability lies in having taught this future celebrity. Personally, I think the sourced material about him being a polygamist lends itself to better hooks. But ALT2 is too matter-of-fact. Could you suggest something else? Yoninah (talk) 17:21, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I believe slight misleading hooks are often approved, as long as they are technically accurate. Indeed, you are rejecting ALT2 for being too "matter-of-fact." It feels like it's difficult to compose a hook that you would approve of! Was something wrong with ALT1? What about...
  • ALT3: ...that Joseph Forbes had 24 children with two wives? and spent 46 years teaching in American Fork?
  • ALT4: ...that Joseph Forbes lived in Colorado with his second wife while his first wife lived in New Mexico to avoid public disapproval of their polygamy? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 17:42, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Not true. I think ALT2 is too wordy and doesn't give any context (he's a Mormon). ALT4 has the same problem. An extra description would make all the difference. But I like ALT3 if you end it after "wives". Yoninah (talk) 22:54, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Approving ALT3. Offline hook ref AGF and cited inline. Rest of review per Vincent60030. Yoninah (talk) 18:19, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Joseph_Forbes_(educator)&oldid=881388174"