Talk:A Proportional Response

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Z1720 in topic Did you know nomination

Did you know nomination

edit
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 Z1720 (talk18:40, 6 July 2022 (UTC)Reply

Converted from a redirect by Theleekycauldron (talk). Self-nominated at 09:06, 10 June 2022 (UTC).Reply

@Theleekycauldron: I'll go ahead and take this review!

  •  Y Article is new enough and long enough, despite what DYK Check says. Expanded from a redirect within the last day.
  •  Y Article is adequately sourced (as a note, I applaud the cited plot summary)
  •  Y Article is neutral, accurately representing the opinions of reviewers of the subject
  •  Y Article does not plagiarize, taking only small quotes from its sources and not closely paraphrasing
  •  Y Both hooks are well-cite. The first draws directly from a quote from its article, while the second accurately reflects the reliable Vanity Fair article
  •  Y Both hooks are interesting and intrigue the reader about the article
  •  Y QPQ done

I personally prefer ALT1 as a hook and fact in general. The original hook solely relies on one reviewer's opinion, whereas ALT1 has some more substance which is expanded upon in the article. I think both would be fine, but would go with ALT1 all things being equal.   other than choosing which hook to go with (both are fine) the article is ready for DYK. Fritzmann (message me) 20:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the speedy review, Fritzmann! Happy to let the promoter choose the hook :) theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 05:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Reply