Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Cabal of Naples

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Cabal of Naples

[edit]
(
)
  • ... that in the early 1600s, the notorious triumvirate Cabal of Naples led painters of the city to harass, expel, or poison any non-native painter so that commissions would be won by local artists?

Created by Mindmatrix (talk). Self nom at 17:12, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

  • The user has half a dozen DYKs from 2008 and a couple since, so a quid pro quo (QPQ) review of another DYK submission is required in order for this nomination to be eligible for approval. The reviewing guide is here, and the DYK general rules are here with clarifications here. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:48, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Striking ALT2 as it's over the maximum length; it has 208 characters. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I think you meant to strike ALT1. Mindmatrix 21:51, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • You're absolutely right; I should have struck ALT1. My apologies for the error; thanks for fixing it. ALT2's length is fine. Reviewer for nomination still requested. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:31, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Prose size (text only): 4025 B on Jan 1, up from 0 as this is a new article created Dec 27, thus date and size are ok. No close paraphrasing for online cites (actually I fixed one during review, but the others I could check were ok); offline refs accepted AGF; QPQ done. Original hook, imo, is much more interesting than ALT2. Paragraphs are adequately cited; using original hook means tweaking hook/cite, which should be easy enough to do by using a short and separate lead. I added an image to the article during review. This article appears ready to go for ALT2, but if the more interesting, original hook is used, it needs the hook, as phrased, and cite in the lead. — Sctechlaw (talk) 12:19, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm not clear what you think is needed, since separating the lead doesn't seem to address hook citation issues. Do you think that in order to use the original hook an inline source citation is specifically needed after the article's opening sentence? Or are you saying that there's a problem with the hook itself—some sort of discrepancy with the article? I think it's important for this to be clarified, and fixed if at all possible. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 14:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Could be you're not clear because I sure wasn't, heh. If we use the original hook or a modified form of the original:
ALT3: ... that the notorious triumvirate Cabal of Naples led local artists to harass, expel, or poison non-local painters so that art commissions would be won by local artists?
then shouldn't the last sentence of the article lead be altered to match? If it's not necessary they exactly match then the original hook or ALT3, as well as ALT2 are usable. The original is already cited, it's just the wording that's different, unless in my flu-fever I missed something else. — Sctechlaw (talk) 14:50, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Sorry to hear that you're fluish. I hope you recover quickly. There's no rule I know of that says the text in the hook must be the same as the text in the article, simply that all the facts given in the hook must also appear in the article and all be inline sourced there. You generally want hooks to be pithier and less explanatory than the article. I've struck your ALT3 because I don't think it's as effective as the original; among other things, it uses "local artists" twice. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: are there any outstanding issues I need to address? Mindmatrix 15:19, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Reviewer needed to recheck and confirm which of the hooks (if not all of them) are approved. I don't believe there are any issues outstanding; sorry for not seeing this sooner. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:31, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
  • The original is best, I think, but it could be made snappier with a bit of rewording along the lines of the following. If the nominator is OK with that, I'm happy to sign it off. Prioryman (talk) 20:53, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
I'm OK with this option, but let's retain the link to commission (art), as the term may be confused with commission (remuneration). Mindmatrix 21:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed that (the dangers of copying and pasting!). I'm happy to give this a now and say that it's good to go. Prioryman (talk) 21:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Cabal_of_Naples&oldid=880771036"