- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:40, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
King's shilling edit
( )
- ... that some people who took the King's shilling (shilling pictured) were often drunk when they did so?
- ALT1:...
that Gerry Adams took the Queen's shilling upon appointment as Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead? - Reviewed: William Honan
- ALT1:...
5x expanded by Microchip08 (talk), The C of E (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 12:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC).
- Began review. AshLin (talk) 10:37, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- New enough.
- @The C of E:, @Microchip08:. Does NOT meet 5x expansion.
- Last revision before expansion dated 12 November 2013 shows 797 chars on using DYKCheck. Hence minimum 3985 chars required (excluding wikitext, citations, templates etc) as calculated using DYKCheck.
- Latest version shows only : 2369 characters (422 words) "readable prose size" using DYKCheck.
as of now. Further review checking after this criteria is satisfied. AshLin (talk) 10:37, 18 May 2014 (UTC)- . Oppose ALT1. The source for this is a lifestyle column in a newspaper, not a news report ... and in any case, the article misrepresents the column. The column says "To great hilarity all round, UK Prime Minister David Cameron even told the House of Commons last week that Adams had agreed to go along with the tradition -- a statement which was immediately denied by Provos in Belfast, who may be happy enough to take the queen's shilling and the Northern Bank millions but firmly draw the line at taking anything like the Chiltern Hundreds as well."
- The "Queens Shilling" referred to here is the salary claimed by Sinn Fein elected representatives, not the notional office of Crown Steward and Bailiff of the Manor of Northstead. The article would be better off without the use of a politically partisan reference, but if it is to be kept, it should at least be used accurately. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the reference to Gerry Adams per WP:BLP, because it misrepresents the source. That leaves a citation needed on the previous sentence. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- See discussion at Talk:King's shilling#Gerry_Adams_and_resignation_from_the_House_of_Commons.
- Note that other concerns have been raised at Talk:King's_shilling#Royal_Navy. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
- And the latest version uses a blog as a source. That fails WP:SELFPUBLISHED. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:08, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the reference to Gerry Adams per WP:BLP, because it misrepresents the source. That leaves a citation needed on the previous sentence. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Given the issues previously raised on the continuing instability on the article (currently over the inclusion of a sentence based on a "viewpoint" piece in the Irish Examiner), I think it's time to close this as unsuccessful. If it ever becomes a Good Article it can be nominated then. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
The reversion on the examiner was erroneous. The justification in the description bringing it in was not challenged since. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 22:01, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- I did check both article and talk page before I wrote the above: you were reverted twice (by different people) on the new Examiner source, and rightfully so, not erroneously (it's an opinion piece, and must be considered non-neutral). I've now made it three times. If you revert again, this nomination will be rejected. In the meantime, ALT1 remains struck, and the article has at least one bare URL that needs fixing. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- In the interests of clearing the DYK backlog of noms which have stagnated, please close this nom. I cannot comment on the Irish Examiner question raised above, but I am convinced that this nom should now be closed because on 11 May the prose character count was 1523, and today 6 June it is 3675, therefore not yet a 5x expansion. The creator and nominator have had time since 18 May to complete the expansion but have not done so, or asked for more time to do so.--Storye book (talk) 14:23, 6 June 2014 (UTC)