Template:Did you know nominations/Utopian thinking
- 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: rejected by reviewer, closed by Z1720 talk 19:22, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Utopian thinking
- ... that utopian thinking can help people overcome their tendencies to justify existing social structures? Source: "In the inaugural empirical exploration of utopian thinking, it has consistently emerged that such thinking diminishes system justification." (First sentence of the section 'Overcome system justification')
- ALT1: ... that both liberals and conservatives value family, economic prosperity, and freedom when they engage in utopian thinking? Source: "Both liberal and conservative perspectives consistently emphasized the value of family, community, economic prosperity, and the pursuit of health, happiness, and freedom." (Under the section 'Political orientation')
- Reviewed:
- Comment: Hi, this is a new page that I wrote, mainly summarizing social psychological research on functions of utopian thinking. Thank you for your kind consideration and contribution to Wikipedia.
Moved to mainspace by Kiwimiho (talk). Self-nominated at 00:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Utopian thinking; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
While I consider this a great first effort at tackling a very complex topic as a first article, the nom'd article is unfortunately too full of uncited statements and essay-like speech. I did a cursory once-over to catch a couple of the more obvious problems, but I don't see this article being approved sufficiently within a reasonable timeframe, particularly with the long wait time on this nomination. Despite my rejection of this hook, I highly encourage Kiwimiho to stick with their editing—this is a promising start! Thanks and all the best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 07:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
