Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle

< Template:Did you know nominations
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 Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle

edit
(
)
  • Reviewed Ninjala I believe I have less than 5 main page DYKs so no QPQ was strictly necessary

Improved to Good Article status by Barkeep49 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:32, 30 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Would "travelogue" fit better than "travel log"? Raymie (t • c) 21:51, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Raymie, I made the change in the hook. Here's a review:
  • GA icon received same day as DYK nomination. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. I question the use of publisher's websites as sources, as they are WP:PRIMARY; please remove Goodreads, Scholastic, HarperCollins Childrens, and any other promotional pages you're using as sources. Please tell me what kind of a source you're using for the second hook fact about the travelogue. QPQ done; thank you for that. Yoninah (talk) 01:01, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah: thanks for the review and copyedit. The hook is sourced from Jones, Douglas A. "The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle." I have removed the goodreads sentence as non-essential and replaced the Scholastic source with School Library Journal. The remaining change is going to be more time intensive to do and given that no part of the hook is cited to to it (with ALA and the above source the citations for the two pieces ofinformation), can I ask under what DYK criteria these changes are requested? Thanks again and Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Barkeep49: well, first, if this is a GA, it should meet all Wikipedia standards, or it should be returned for reassessment. Similarly, since DYK hooks appear on the main page, we want them to meet the Wikipedia criteria, even if they are start-class articles. Thank you for removing the publisher's websites. If the remaining sources have no information cited to them, why can't you just remove them? In a DYK, not everything has to be cited; there just has to be a minimum of one citation per paragraph. Yoninah (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah: Sorry I wasn't clear about your request. What is left from your request for change in sources are citation for several less prominent awards (mainly children's statewide readers awards) which are nicely collected at the publisher's page. I am not willing to just take the information out of the article especially because it doesn't relate to the DYK hook. As both the reviewer of the article and I have around 25 GA reviews to our names neither of us are unfamiliar with GA criteria which is why I asked about the DYK criteria justification which I'm admittedly not as familiar with. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 20:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Barkeep49: oh, now I see what you're citing. Usually when I write an article and find a list of awards in a primary cite, I just search for them on Google with the winner's name and then I can provide an independent source for them. Are you able to do that for at least some of them? Yoninah (talk) 20:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
  • One from the Chicago Tribune and The Courier-Journal (Louisville, KY). Nova Crystallis (Talk) 05:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Old ALA awards are particularly hard to cite with online sources. The Children's list has a good source [1] (which can also cite the Globe award which I believe is also noted in another existing source). The best I could find for Young Adult was [2]. I haven't made serious efforts to track down individual citations for the other awards (except as noted below). I would however ask you to reconsider the larger point, first as a requirement beyond DYK and second as not actually running afoul of WP:PRIMARY. I could explain why but won't since I think the real issue is with HarperCollin's not being a WP:INDY/WP:RS source. I can likely track them down but they'll be no more Independent than the publisher. For instance [3] cites the Judy Lopez award but is obviously not independent of the award nor has any more editorial control (and as someone who has been in charge of a statewide children's choice reading award perhaps less) than Harper Collins. Is the effort to change the sources going to really improve the quality of those sources or would it just be a shuffling? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:53, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
  • I have added a number of the citations mentioned in the previous discussion, and some others, to the page to try to move this along. That said, I actually agree with Barkeep49 that requiring them is perhaps overly restrictive. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • "Class and gender play a substantial role in the novel and help to frame it as a quest story". Do any of the sources discuss race? The book is mentioned in passing in "Sturdy Black Bridges": Discussing Race, Class, and Gender by KaaVonia Hinton but it would be good to cite a source that focuses specifically on race in Charlotte Doyle. (I'm about to leave on vacation, so I can't follow it up myself.) Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 14:04, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your work on sourcing. I can tell you there was not substantial mention of race in the current sources (there might have been passing reference) and so hadn't included it to date. If we can find a couple sources that analyze it through that frame it would obviously improve the article (I don't have access to the Hinton source). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:29, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
  • The question I raised about discussions of race was not intended to slow the nomination; as far as I'm concerned, this could (and should) go forward. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Mary Mark Ockerbloom has done a fantastic job of improving the sourcing and content, and I have taken the liberty of adding her name to the DYK creation credits. The article looks in very good shape now. Offline hook ref AGF and cited inline. However, the date in the hook is wrong. The hook should read:
  • ALT0a: ... that The True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle, a 1991 Newbery Honor book, was written in the style of a 19th-century travelogue?
  • Rest of my review above. ALT0a good to go. Yoninah (talk) 16:47, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/The_True_Confessions_of_Charlotte_Doyle&oldid=860216204"