Template:Did you know nominations/Nightswimming (Awake)
- The following discussion 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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Length
Nightswimming (Awake)
edit- ... that parts of "Nightswimming", an Awake episode, commended filming at a campus swimming pool?
- Comment: Though it was created much sooner, the information above was only just expanded the other day. Cheers,
Created/expanded by TBrandley (talk). Self nom at 03:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Article is 2159 words; it was 1700 words before the expansion in the five-day period began. In order to be eligible, the article needs to be expanded fivefold; you would need to expand it to 8500 words (about 4x what it is now). Do you think you could do that? TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your review! I'll try to find more information for the article. Cheers, TBrandley 03:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
- I find it highly unlikely that you will be able to expand this article to the length it needs to be. You would have to duplicate the article's current length four times. I recommend withdrawing this nomination. But do not feel discouraged; I hope you will resubmit an eligible article. Let me know if you concur with my assessment. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 04:08, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
The article is currently only 2417 words (not a big difference than before). There is no way you could get this article up to 8500 words by the 25th (tomorrow). If you did, it would probably be a lot of fluff, which in turn would lower the article's quality. Therefore, the article is ineligible for DYK. I encourage you to try again with a different, newer article. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
But by the way, if you truly think you can up the article's prose that much by tomorrow, without degrading the quality, let me know and you can have until then. TRLIJC19 (talk • contribs) 02:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- Most likely, no. But, just in case, please keep this open. Cheers, TBrandley 02:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) The time to nominate an article is within five days of the initial expansion, which in this case began on August 2. Once you get that initial block of article text in, if it's sizable, it's just about impossible to achieve a 5x expansion after another five days have passed and the block is part of your baseline to expand from. This is especially true of television articles, where there's only so big you can make a production or reception or plot section. Since this was nominated on August 22, we look to the size the article was immediate before five days before that nomination. In this case, the article had 10199 prose characters (we go by characters, not words) on August 11, and today it has 14534. That isn't even a 2x expansion. To get to 5x, you'd need to more than triple the size of the article as it is now, to 50995 prose characters, an increase of 36461 characters. As TRLIJC19 notes, that just isn't feasible. At this point, it's best to aim for a GAN; the time to submit this was August 7 or 8. Now that you know, I hope we can look forward to future submissions coming in earlier in the game, and not running into these (generally quite inflexible) time/expansion rules.
- I should point out that there is no one-day deadline at this point, in the unlikely event that you think you can write another 36461 characters. You would have a reasonable period of time—a week, certainly, but there is some flexibility if it would run you a little longer—to complete the expansion. This is standard practice around here, if someone comes in short. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
As the article has just been made a Good Article and gone through a peer review with the intention of submitting to FAC, the notion that this might suddenly triple in size is no longer credible. As such, I'm reinstating TRLIJC19's X; this article simply won't qualify for DYK. Congratulations on the other milestones! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:40, 30 August 2012 (UTC)