Template:Did you know nominations/Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery
- 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 The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery
- ...
that the shooting of Ahmaud Arbery became a viral video?Source: Vox
Created by Colinmcdermott (talk) and Starship.paint (talk). Nominated by Starship.paint (talk) at 05:47, 7 May 2020 (UTC).
- This strikes me as in somewhat poor taste — "became a viral video" make it sound like it's "The Hampsterdance Song". I see what it's trying to say, but the tone is wrong. (The linked source does have that issue in the headline, too, but it doesn't come off that way quite as strongly with the headline's wording, to me anyway.) Just my 2¢. —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 21:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that although the people involved in the shooting of Ahmaud Arbery were immediately identified by police, arrests were only made 74 days later, after a video of the shooting was publicized? Sources: WaPo and AJC
- @Goldenshimmer: - how about the above? starship.paint (talk) 08:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Resolves my concern, looks good to me! Thanks starship.paint. —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 04:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
- Goldenshimmer - thank you. Do you have concerns about the article itself? starship.paint (talk) 10:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
- starship.paint: As an article it seems solid, and while I'm certainly no DYK expert, it seems to meet the guidelines. —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 23:48, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
- Goldenshimmer - thank you. Do you have concerns about the article itself? starship.paint (talk) 10:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
(←) 
Needs full review - prior tick did not address the criteria. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- (If it's any help, I did go through the list at Wikipedia:Did_you_know#Eligibility_criteria and it appeared to meet all the points, in case that wasn't clear from my earlier comment. Of course, if I missed something or otherwise did it wrong, never mind, and sorry for the trouble! First time commenting on one of these, so I'm not used to the procedure...) —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 21:19, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
- Goldenshimmer No big deal. It was everyone's first DYK review some time. All you need to do is list out that each criteria is met. I've pasted the checklist below. Just put a
yin all of the fields that apply, and the review will be good to go. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)- The Squirrel Conspiracy Thanks! I've filled it in (hope you don't mind I replaced your signature in the template, since I didn't want to inadvertently "forge" it!) —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 22:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Goldenshimmer No big deal. It was everyone's first DYK review some time. All you need to do is list out that each criteria is met. I've pasted the checklist below. Just put a
- (If it's any help, I did go through the list at Wikipedia:Did_you_know#Eligibility_criteria and it appeared to meet all the points, in case that wasn't clear from my earlier comment. Of course, if I missed something or otherwise did it wrong, never mind, and sorry for the trouble! First time commenting on one of these, so I'm not used to the procedure...) —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 21:19, 31 May 2020 (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 |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Sourcing: while I'd consider WGXA and The Daily Beast aren't the best sources — former's part of Sinclair Broadcast Group, which hasn't a stellar reputation, and the latter's quite tabloidy — the first is used in conjunction with other sources, and the latter is attributed when used alone, so I think it's fine. Note that aside from the hook and a couple other things I checked, I'm mostly taking it on faith that the citations provided support the text. Plagiarism-free: to the best of my knowledge — I don't see anything where the text "smells" like plagiarism, anyway. —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 22:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Review looks good now. Thanks Goldenshimmer and sorry for all the hoop-jumping. This project loves its bureaucracy sometimes. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:59, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the assistance! —{{u|Goldenshimmer}} (they/them)｜Talk｜Contributions 00:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)