Template:Did you know nominations/The End (sculpture)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Lightburst (talk) 17:44, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

The End (sculpture)

Created by Cielquiparle (talk). Self-nominated at 09:05, 13 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The End (sculpture); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

  • The article is new enough and long enough and QPQ has been done. Citations are formatted well enough and sources are reliable. I know there is no consensus on the reliability of the Evening Standard (per WP:RSP), though I will let it pass because the claim sourced to it is not contentious. The hook is interesting enough for DYK and is mentioned in the article. It seems to be sourced to Observer. I would advise to note the source when nominating in the future, though I was able to identify it so I will approve it. The only thing preventing me from approving this article is stating the sculpture was "widely interpreted as taking on new meaning" in the 2nd paragraph of the background section, which is a weasel word not backed up by the sources listed, which violates NPOV. You should probably check the sources backing up the "Many observers emphasized" sentence in the 2nd paragraph of the reception section given it may have a similar issue, though I can not verify the issue because one of the sources is paywalled. ~UN6892 tc 22:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
@Cielquiparle: I see you have fixed my initial issue. Can you verify that source 14 (paywalled) prevents a similar issue in the 2nd paragraph of the Reception section or change the wording? After that, I will approve this nomination. ~UN6892 tc 15:23, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
@Username6892: Thank you very much for the careful read and thoughtful comments. I've edited further (and also expanded the direct quote and tweaked the hook) and I think it is looking better than before. Please let me know if you have any other questions or suggestions. (Hopefully the "walled" URLs in the refs should work now if you log in to Wikipedia Library first before clicking on them.) Cielquiparle (talk) 09:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
@Cielquiparle: I'll reread the article tonight. When I reviewed initially, I assumed I wouldn't be able to access The Wikipedia Library because I had misread the requirements (I thought it was 500 edits in the past 6 months) so I was prepared to AGF on them. I should be good with them now. ~UN6892 tc 10:51, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
I apologize for not doing this earlier, I likely caught COVID and have to deal with worsening symptoms. Expect a review tomorrow when I'm feeling a bit less tired. ~UN6892 tc 02:54, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
@Username6892: Rest and get well soon. There is no rush at all. Cielquiparle (talk) 07:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
No further problems found upon rereading the article. ~UN6892 tc 13:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)