Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Levine

Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of Adam Levine's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: rejected by Miyagawa (talk) 15:31, 14 April 2013 (UTC).

Adam Levine

edit
  • ... that Maroon 5 frontman Adam Levine launched his debut scent a year after he tweeted that celebrity fragrances should be made "punishable by death"?

Created/expanded by GinaJay (talk). Self nominated at 13:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC).

  • Afraid this one is unlikely to make the cut for DYK due to the expansion size. Prior to your first edits, it was 8709 characters. Thus it would need to be increased to around 43,000 characters to meet the expansion, and that would be if we didn't note that the first edits are outside of the five day window for expansion. At present the article is just over 14000 characters, so well under where a 5x expansion would need to be. What I would suggest if you wanted to use that hook is that perhaps you could find 1500 characters on just the fragrance and create a new article for it. I know there's articles on the Katy Perry perfumes, so I don't see why this wouldn't meet the notability criteria presuming the sources exist for it. Miyagawa (talk) 18:49, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Remember only 2 x expansion is required for BLPs not 5. Needs about 4kb more of prose to pass.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 17:04, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Unsourced BLPs require 2x. This wasn't unsourced. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:07, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
This perfume line doesn't really have enough notability to undergo a 5x, or even 2x, expansion without destroying the coverage proportion of the article it's on. And there's not enough info to make a whole new article. So I guess this hook doesn't really stand a chance of being a DYK ...? GinaJay (talk) 14:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)