Template:Did you know nominations/Dearborn-Putnam controversy
- 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 — Maile (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Dearborn-Putnam controversy
edit
... that Henry Dearborn, accused Israel Putnam (both pictured) of cowardice at the Battle of Bunker Hill, 43 years after the battle, resulting in the Dearborn-Putnam controversy beginning in 1818?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Elfe House
- Comment: Hook information and citation in the The controversy section.
Created by Gwillhickers (talk). Self-nominated at 22:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC).
This article is new enough and certainly long enough. The hook facts are reliably sourced and have inline citations. The images are in the public domain and the article is neutral. I have not got access to most of the sources so I am unable to assess whether there are any copyright issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:29, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you @Cwmhiraeth:. Outside of making specific quotes, (always enclosed with quotation marks), I can tell you that I was careful not to paraphrase anything but common and short phrases of fact, etc. Most of the sources are linked to Google books and other online sources, so if there is any particular item in the narrative that you would like clarification or reassurance with I will be more than happy to help. Again, thank you for your efforts here. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
- The hook could use some tightening:
- ALT1:
... that 43 years after the Battle of Bunker Hill, Henry Dearborn accused Israel Putnam (both pictured) of cowardice?Yoninah (talk) 20:33, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Not the best hook. The name of the article, which mentions the controversy, should be spelled out in bold, as is the convention most often used for DYK nominations. The hook, is well under 200 characters, and isn't anything that merits shrinking the statement so. Mentioning controversy will also create more interest and curiosity and will increase the number of views the article will receive when it is presented on the WP main page. ALT1 doesn't tell the reader that Dearborn's accusations resulted in a controversy. ALT1 also has four links run together side by side. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Piped links are used just as often as article titles in DYK hooks. You can certainly keep your article title, but the various numbers in the hook are confusing. What do you think about:
- ALT2: ... that the Dearborn-Putnam controversy erupted when Henry Dearborn accused Israel Putnam (both pictured) of cowardice 43 years after the Battle of Bunker Hill? Yoninah (talk) 22:59, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- I don't see anything confusing about mentioning the year 1818. Also, the prose reads better when we mention the various items in the order they occurred. The people (names) and the accusations existed/occurred first and the resultant controversy followed. Prefer to keep my original hook that has already been approved. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I think ALT2 is a considerable improvement on the original hook, which in any case needs alteration to its punctuation. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- ALT2 is certainly better than ALT1, but I still feel the original is best for reasons mentioned. The original hook unfolds in chronological sequence. Oh well, I'll let the powers that be decide when it comes time to post the nomination on the main page. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I think ALT2 is a considerable improvement on the original hook, which in any case needs alteration to its punctuation. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:06, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- I don't see anything confusing about mentioning the year 1818. Also, the prose reads better when we mention the various items in the order they occurred. The people (names) and the accusations existed/occurred first and the resultant controversy followed. Prefer to keep my original hook that has already been approved. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 00:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Here is the hook, using the same basic words as ALT2, but rendered in chronological sequence. Hope this is satisfactory to all involved here.
- ALT3 ... that when Henry Dearborn accused Israel Putnam (both pictured) of cowardice, 43 years after the Battle of Bunker Hill, it erupted in the Dearborn-Putnam controversy? -- Gwillhickers (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
- Not the best hook. The name of the article, which mentions the controversy, should be spelled out in bold, as is the convention most often used for DYK nominations. The hook, is well under 200 characters, and isn't anything that merits shrinking the statement so. Mentioning controversy will also create more interest and curiosity and will increase the number of views the article will receive when it is presented on the WP main page. ALT1 doesn't tell the reader that Dearborn's accusations resulted in a controversy. ALT1 also has four links run together side by side. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you @Cwmhiraeth:. Outside of making specific quotes, (always enclosed with quotation marks), I can tell you that I was careful not to paraphrase anything but common and short phrases of fact, etc. Most of the sources are linked to Google books and other online sources, so if there is any particular item in the narrative that you would like clarification or reassurance with I will be more than happy to help. Again, thank you for your efforts here. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Article is good to go. Personally, I think ALT2 is catchier and I prefer its use of active voice, but ALT3 is acceptable. (The original hook was not in the snappy catchy style desired at DYK) I'll let the promoter make the call. Montanabw(talk) 04:05, 24 May 2016 (UTC)