Template:Did you know nominations/Pat Loika

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) 05:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Pat Loika edit

(

)

Loika at 2012's Long Beach Comic Con

~~... that BuzzFeed likened the work of Pat Loika to that of Oprah for the comic book industry?~~ Source: [1]
- ALT1:... that Pat Loika, a podcaster from San Diego, was born in the Philippines? Source: [2]

Reviewed: I have reviewed the DYK nomination for Danhai Light Rail Transit here.
Comment: According to DyK this would be my 16th DYK if it was accepted. It also is the end to a long wikibreak. The article is brand new, and is 1,811 characters long by my count. It is a BLP article, and all sections are cited to reliable sources, largely drawing on the Buzzfeed profile of the subject. There is another lengthy profile of the subject on Playboy Philippines, but it is behind a paywall (it is valid as a Reliable Source per WP:OFFLINE). This article, as it is brand new has not yet been on the main page, and is not a translation off another languages wiki, to the best of my knowledge. Both hooks are verified using the Buzzfeed profile article on the subject.

Created by RightCowLeftCoast (talk). Self-nominated at 20:33, 30 October 2016 (UTC).

ALT1a: ... that BuzzFeed opined that what Oprah is to talk shows, Pat Loika is to the comic book industry? Yoninah (talk) 23:57, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

That was the opinion of Buzzfeed, yes.

I can also suggest a new one.

ALT2: ... that a character whose appearance is similar to Pat Loika appeared in an issue of Uncanny X-Men as a S.H.I.E.L.D. agent?

This is 118 characters long, with spaces.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Ready for full review. Yoninah (talk) 13:50, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

I have serious doubts about the notability of this individual. The only substantive secondary source coverage they have is on buzzfeed, and even that is barely seen as a WP:RS, if at all...Additionally, ALT1a is the only hook that is close to acceptable: The original is not clear in what it is saying, ALT1 is "meh" in the extreme (there are plenty of other philipinos in California) and ALT2 is sourced to instagram (which is rather inappropriate as a source anyway. I'm almost inclined to fail this for not demonstrating notability. I do note, though, that the page is new enough, long enough, neutral, and free of copyright issues. Vanamonde (talk) 17:18, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Vanamonde, if the subject isn't notable, then AfD is the place to take the article. If it doesn't survive, then the nomination here closes; if it does, then the review continues. Otherwise, the DYK nom is left in limbo, and since it's already over two months old, it needs to get settled one way or the other. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, BlueMoonset, you are correct: but in my experience, litigating an AfD often takes a month or more, especially in the case of a borderline-notable subject such as this. Therefore, I wish to attempt a shortcut, and offer the nominator the chance to demonstrate notability by providing another secondary source with substantive coverage. We frequently hold up nominations over other issues of policy compliance, including neutrality and verifiability, and while I know that we like to think of notability as a bright line for inclusion, the fact is that the policy allows for a large grey area, in which many articles float. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 03:30, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

This is covered in the comment section of the nomination. Subject was also given significant coverage in Playboy Philippines. Therefore given that there are two non-primary reliable sources giving the subject significant coverage the subject meets WP:GNG.

Perhaps the user Vanamonde93 would like to suggest a hook?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Specifically, the subject appears to meet WP:WEBCRIT, given significant coverage by (at least) Buzzfeed and Playboy Philippines.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Directly pinging Vanamonde for a response, since there was no ping in the previous replies. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:07, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Huh, missed that comment somehow. Anyhow, I see that it's been cited, so okay. Still not comfortable with the use of instagram as a source. Can that be removed, or another source found? Notability concern has been addressed. Vanamonde (talk) 05:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

If we utilize the ALT1a hook be utilized? Is sourcing to the primary source of the actual issue per WP:PLOT, sufficient? Or reworded to say like, according to Loika himself... ?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93:If we utilize the ALT1a hook it has already been sourced?

Is sourcing to the primary source of the actual issue per MOS:PLOT, sufficient? Or reworded to say like, according to Loika himself... ?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:06, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

I'd rather it be removed, because even if you provided in-text attribution, it could easily be construed as promotional material, even if that is not the intent. Otherwise, you could find a secondary source covering it. Vanamonde (talk) 09:26, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Change requested has been made here.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:34, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Should be GTG. Vanamonde (talk) 07:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)