- 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) 22:31, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Robert Donati
edit- ... that journalist Stephen Kurkjian claims murdered Boston mobster Robert Donati masterminded the the world's largest art theft to get his boss out of jail? Source: Kurkjian, Stephen (2015). The Master Thieves: The Boston Gangsters who Pulled Off the World's Greatest Art Heist. New York: PublicAffairs Books. p. 196. ISBN 9781610394239. Retrieved September 19, 2016.
- Reviewed: Anthony M. Villane
- Comment:
I will be asking for expedited review of this WT:DYK since the 25-year anniversary in question is September 24, i.e. tomorrowMissed it; never mind now. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Created by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 19:14, 23 September 2016 (UTC).
@Daniel Case: New enough, long enough. No copyvios I can find. Both parts of the hook are sourced to a book I don't have access to, so AGFing on hook sources. However, the review you have used as a QPQ doesn't mention copyvios/close paraphrasing. Pppery 21:41, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Pppery:I guess because it had never been bot-reviewed, and I generally trust Alan to not do that. But anyway, it gets a pretty clean bill of health). Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
New reviewer needed to determine if Daniel Case's belated addition to the QPQ review above makes it acceptable. Otherwise, I would give this an AGF tick. Pppery 19:05, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
- Since we've missed the date I had in mind I will be revising the hook. Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
- Daniel Case, it's been over two weeks. Please revise the hook soon. I should probably note that I am skeptical of the hook as written, since it states the belief that he was the mastermind (and why) in Wikipedia's voice and without qualification, though it is a theory that is not subscribed to by the FBI, for instance. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:01, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Since we've missed the date I had in mind I will be revising the hook. Daniel Case (talk) 19:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Pppery:I guess because it had never been bot-reviewed, and I generally trust Alan to not do that. But anyway, it gets a pretty clean bill of health). Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: I should have stated that I already had ... I thought it would be obvious from looking at it that I had taken the anniversary connection out of it. I will be, with this edit, further revising it to take your comment into account (I have attributed it to Kurkjian since he built his book around it, but he is not the only one). Daniel Case (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- New review needed Daniel Case (talk) 04:20, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: I should have stated that I already had ... I thought it would be obvious from looking at it that I had taken the anniversary connection out of it. I will be, with this edit, further revising it to take your comment into account (I have attributed it to Kurkjian since he built his book around it, but he is not the only one). Daniel Case (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
I am reviewing the replacement hook, which is different to original. This one is short enough, confirmed by the article, referenced, and confirmed by reference. Also confirming that correct person is credited. based on Pppery's review, this is OK to proceed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
