- 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) 05:11, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Spider-Man (Insomniac Games)
edit
Created/expanded by Jhenderson777 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:13, 31 January 2019 (UTC).
Probably should hold off on DYK until merge discussion is resolved. Daniel Case (talk) 07:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Yes agreed. Jhenderson 777 03:25, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
- The tag should be removed, then. Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Full review needed now that merge template has been removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:46, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: Would you like to do a full review now that the merge tag has been removed or would you like someone else to do so?--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 18:54, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
- @SkyGazer 512: Daniel never responded, I guess you should be free to do this now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- I personally don't really have any particular interest in reviewing this article, I just wanted to notify Daniel that the merge tag had been removed so that he could finish the review if that's what he wanted.--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 00:06, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- New reviewer needed to do a full review of the nomination. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:14, 25 March 2019 (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
|
|
|
Overall: Wouldn't be more accurate to say: "a version of the original Spider-Man"? Since this is not the original Spider-Man created by Lee and Ditko but a version written specifically for the game, how is the link "original Spider-Man" not an WP:EASTEREGG? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 06:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Ok. I am welcome to any alternatives. Jhenderson 777 23:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Coffeeandcrumbs, since you wouldn't want to have "version of" twice in the same hook, how about the following ALT hook that's a modification of the original:
- I'm undecided as to whether the word "variant" should be included before or after the bold link; I initially thought so, but now would only include it if absolutely necessary. Jhenderson777, what do you think? Note that I am seeing more than five prior DYK credits, so a QPQ review will be required. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry of my blonde moment but what’s a QPG? Also I don’t mind the word variant either. Jhenderson 777 23:45, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- WP:QPQ is a requirement. You just have to review one other DYK nomination. You can also suggest a new ALT2 below. I will return to review everything again. I watching this page.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Oh yes that. I knew that outside of the title. I reviewed at least one nomination. In fact I am going to check and see how it’s doing. I think it’s stll there. Jhenderson 777 00:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Jhenderson777: Apologies for I must say. @BlueMoonset: I would recommend resetting this user's DYKcredits count back to 2 (this being their 3rd) and not require a QPQ here. We are ill-served by forcing this user with little experience in current DYK standards to review another article. They previously had an incomplete review and were lucky to catch a good DYK from an experienced editor. Agreed?--- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Coffeeandcrumbs, it's not within my power (or anyone else's) to "reset" DYK credits below five. If you want to give them a free pass, you could always donate a review of your own—as long as a review is done, it doesn't have to be the nominator, just that they're responsible for supplying one unless someone else volunteers. One way to learn how to do a good review is to do a review and then be coached through improving it—everyone has to do QPQs eventually if they stick around long enough. A year ago, Jhenderson777 put through a nomination and did a quid pro quo review then; they seem willing enough to do one now. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Sound fair. @Jhenderson777: please complete a review. I help you through it.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset:. I prefer your alternate hook. I am not sure I see why we need to use the word variant. @Coffeeandcrumbs: Thanks for the offer to guide me through it. I reviewed another. Originally when I did dyk hooks I don’t think they had that rule to review another. I am that old of an editor. Jhenderson 777 18:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Jhenderson777: Thank you for doing a review. In the future when doing reviews, you should write a short summary like below stating that you have checked all the items on the checklist. Please also cite the sources for the names of voice actors. See the (citation needed) tag I add on the article.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Moved from sandbox on January 29, 2019. New enough when nominated. Long enough at 12543 characters. Neutral and well-sourced. No visible signs of close paraphrasing or plagiarism. EarWig only flags direct quotes. The hook is interesting and not entirely based in a fictional world. ALT 1 is good to go.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:01, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Wouldn't be more accurate to say: "a version of the original Spider-Man"? Since this is not the original Spider-Man created by Lee and Ditko but a version written specifically for the game, how is the link "original Spider-Man" not an WP:EASTEREGG? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 06:43, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
