- 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 Yoninah (talk) 21:52, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Mhairi Black
edit- ... that Mhairi Black is the Baby of the House?
- ALT1:... that Mhairi Black is the youngest elected British Member of Parliament since 1832?
- Reviewed: Ip Man (film series)
- Comment: Apologies in advance if I have left anyone out of the credits list. The contribution history is quite long for a four day old article. Feel free to add those missing.
Created by Fuebaey (talk), Jnestorius (talk), Egghead06 (talk), AdamBMorgan (talk), and MaxBrowne (talk). Nominated by Fuebaey (talk) at 09:11, 12 May 2015 (UTC).
- The date 1832 is misleading. The Reform Act 1832 didn't explicitly affect the age of candidacy: rather, it marked the end of a period when various abuses were tolerated. This source says the three under-21s elected in 1820-32 were "within a few weeks of their majorities", hence older than Mhairi Black. I couldn't find precise info to put in the article without violating WP:OR. jnestorius(talk) 10:02, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- Unsure what is being suggested here. This source states she is "the youngest successful candidate since at least the 1832 Reform Act". Unless I have misworded it or there is evidence that another younger person was elected either in 1832 or later, how is ALT1 incorrect? Fuebaey (talk) 12:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
- You are missing the words "at least". "youngest since 1832" suggests that there was definitely someone younger in 1832. There was not. The source says "at least 1832". Therefore the hook should say
- ALT2:... that Mhairi Black is the youngest elected British Member of Parliament since at least 1832?
Article was created on 8 May and nominated on 12 May so is considered new, is long enough at 2,172 characters. hook ALT 2 is sourced and very interesting but article needs changed to reflect the at least part for total parity. There are two issues needing addressing before this is suitable for main page, 1 the references need converted from raw links and the tag removed and 2 the first sentence under personal life is unsourced and should be sourced or removed. @Fuebaey: This needs work before can be approved.Blethering Scot 17:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
- @Blethering Scot: Thanks for the review. Have clarified the hook fact and sourced the football trivia to her party website - primary but I don't think the fact is all that contentious. Someone else seems to have taken care of those bare urls. Fuebaey (talk) 17:25, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
- You are missing the words "at least". "youngest since 1832" suggests that there was definitely someone younger in 1832. There was not. The source says "at least 1832". Therefore the hook should say
The article and hook are OK. They are neutral, correct length and cited. No paraphrasing spotted. I don't understand the image release though. Its from a video and I cannot see the free release for that video. Although if the video is free - then lets have a clip from the video. Victuallers (talk) 17:16, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
- The image was taken from an SNP video uploaded on Youtube. Beneath the video there is an option to show more information, which reveals a license under Creative Commons. Clicking through that leads to this help page and eventually this CC-BY-3.0 license. The picture is there to provide a visual frame of reference for the reader. Not sure what purpose posting the actual video in the article would have and, given its political nature, it may inadvertently provide a platform. Ironically, while going through all that, I noticed the German Wiki posted their article on her three weeks ago, with the image in the lead slot. Fuebaey (talk) 09:24, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Oops sorry to have not spotted your reply. As you say - its fine - it wasn't obvious. I'd prefer a video clip (not the whole "advert"), but the picture is fine. See above. tick. Victuallers (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
