- 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 SL93 (talk) 03:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Frank LoMonte
Created by Sdkb (talk). Self-nominated at 00:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough
|
|
|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
Overall: 
Hi, Sdkb, some comments on the hook. It is interesting, but I think it could be stated more explicitly in the article (you have "outlawing censorship of student media by school administrators" in the hook and "a campaign to pass legislation protecting student press freedom" in the article which isn't exactly the same, imo. Also, In the sourcing I see that he was definitely involved with twelve states, but was the legislation for the other two passed after he left the SPLC? If so, I'd argue he wasn't directly involved in it and trim the hook to "in [at least] 12 US states". Let me know what you think here Eddie891 Talk Work 15:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Eddie891, thanks for the comments!
- Regarding the phrasing, the specifics of what New Voices legislation does are a little farther down in the article:
outlawing many instances of prior review and censorship of student media by school administrators, and restoring the more lenient Tinker standard that was overturned in the 1988 Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier Supreme Court decision.
It can get complicated as you dig more into the weeds, so I was trying to summarize at a high level, but we can definitely tweak the phrasing if that's needed.
- Regarding 12 vs. 14, I went back and forth on that a little in my head before proposing the hook, but I think it's clear enough that LoMonte laid the groundwork for the campaign that it's fair to give him "helped pass" credit for all 14, even if two were after he left the SPLC. It's worth noting that he's still listed on SPLC's website staff page as a "senior legal fellow", so he may have had some direct involvement in the most recent two. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 17:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for getting back to me. Those both make sense, ticking, well done! Eddie891 Talk Work 17:45, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Sdkb, some comments on the hook. It is interesting, but I think it could be stated more explicitly in the article (you have "outlawing censorship of student media by school administrators" in the hook and "a campaign to pass legislation protecting student press freedom" in the article which isn't exactly the same, imo. Also, In the sourcing I see that he was definitely involved with twelve states, but was the legislation for the other two passed after he left the SPLC? If so, I'd argue he wasn't directly involved in it and trim the hook to "in [at least] 12 US states". Let me know what you think here Eddie891 Talk Work 15:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)