Template:Did you know nominations/Impossible Is Nothing (Iggy Azalea song)
- 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: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Multiple requests for QPQ, no response
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Impossible Is Nothing (Iggy Azalea song)
edit... that Iggy Azalea's "Impossible Is Nothing" was compared to songs by Eminem, specifically from his 2010 album, Recovery?
Improved to Good Article status by Coolmarc (talk). Self-nominated at 17:03, 8 October 2015 (UTC).
- Article was promoted to GAN on October 3, nominated for DYK on October 8.
- At 6720 character, it exceeds 1500 minimum requirement.
- Hook is sourced and cited.
- It is within policy.
- Nominator has received five DYK credits. The rules are slightly ambiguous ("nominator has fewer than five DYK credits (whether or not self-nominated) then the nomination is exempt from QPQ") so I assume nominator is exempt, but will not be next time.
- However, the hook is boring and is not interesting. It doesn't even give an example of how or why it received comparisons, and this detail can't be done in a DYK hook. I don't understand why so many clauses are being used either, because it makes it longwinded. Reading the article, a hook about the song being about "underdog triumphalism", or "raps the track's aspirational lyrics with a mantra technique" would be far more likely to grab my attention and make me click to read more. Saying it is similar to Eminem songs without explaining why would not make me click to read more.
— Calvin999 18:17, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
- Hello Calvin999. First of all, thank you for fixing the template for me. This is my first DYK nomination, it was purely by accident. I thought had I explained why it was similar to Eminem's songs, the hook would have become too long. I appreciate your alternative hook suggestions, is there one you specifically think would work? Please let me know. Thanks. CoolMarc 06:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- I've given you suggestions, it's up to you to provide alternative hooks, not me. You could probably come up with a way of combing both of my suggestions into a short, snappy hook. People will click on that. — Calvin999 10:38, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- How does this sound: ALT1:
... that Iggy Azalea raps the "underdog triumphalism" lyrics to "Impossible Is Nothing" with a mantra technique?CoolMarc 11:57, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- How about ALT2: ... that Iggy Azalea employs a mantra technique to rap the "underdog triumphalism" lyrics of "Impossible Is Nothing"? — Calvin999 12:10, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
- How does this sound: ALT1:
- However, the hook is boring and is not interesting. It doesn't even give an example of how or why it received comparisons, and this detail can't be done in a DYK hook. I don't understand why so many clauses are being used either, because it makes it longwinded. Reading the article, a hook about the song being about "underdog triumphalism", or "raps the track's aspirational lyrics with a mantra technique" would be far more likely to grab my attention and make me click to read more. Saying it is similar to Eminem songs without explaining why would not make me click to read more.
- New reviewer needed to check the ALT hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:43, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
@Calvin999:'s ALT2 simply moves around the words of ALT1 so it reads better, so his approval tick is fine. (However, I tweaked the hook some more to get rid of the apostrophe-s after the page title, which wasn't showing up properly.) I quickly double-checked Calvin999's review and found everything in order. However, the nominator needs to submit a QPQ, as he already has 5 DYK credits. I don't understand how the rule is ambiguous ("nominator has fewer than five DYK credits (whether or not self-nominated) then the nomination is exempt from QPQ"). This nominator has exactly 5 DYK credits, so the nomination requires a QPQ. Yoninah (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. It didn't know if nominators had to supply QPQ on their sixth or on the fifth. — Calvin999 22:08, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
- I placed another note on User:Coolmarc's page to do a review so he passes the QPQ requirement. If he doesn't respond in a few days I suggest that this nomination be rejected. The nominator has been given several chances and has chosen not do a review.4meter4 (talk) 06:12, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
