Talk:Dave Wasserman
Latest comment: 1 year ago by SL93 in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Dave Wasserman appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 September 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
edit- 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 SL93 (talk) 20:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that Dave Wasserman has seen enough? Source: Jewish Insider
- Reviewed: Mansiya V.P.
Converted from a redirect by ElectionWiz (talk). Nominated by Feminist (talk) at 06:09, 2 August 2022 (UTC).
Welcome to DYK, ElectionWiz! New enough and long enough. QPQ present. I have two possible concerns for you and Feminist to address.
- Two entire paragraphs depend on summarizing Wasserman's Cook bio. These sections lift too many words in a row (some of which, however, are titles or names of organizations which are permissible and unavoidable). See [1]. Is there anything to break this up a bit? This really needs to be addressed.
- I adore ALT0...but I fear that, for some of our readers outside the United States, this quirky is about as interesting as cricket results are to me, so I'm leaving some possible options here.
- ALT1: ... that Dave Wasserman helped correctly predict the partisan swing in the 2006 United States House of Representatives elections?
- ALT2: ... that a 2016 article by Dave Wasserman foreshadowed the split between the Electoral College and popular vote two months before the 2016 U.S. presidential election?
- The close paraphrasing/copyvio issue must be fixed before I can really contemplate this nomination much further. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:43, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
@Sammi Brie: Thanks for the review and the hooks! I've broken up the words a bit. A new reviewer may be needed for your hooks. feminist (talk) 03:23, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie:, you going to finish this? --evrik (talk) 17:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Evrik: Was waiting for a new reviewer to come along in re: ALT1/ALT2. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie:, I approve Both Alt 1 and Alt 2, though I prefer Alt 2. Actually, Alt 2 could probably be tightened up a litlle, but I still approve them both. I leave it to you to make the final approval. --evrik (talk) 19:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
I believe things are in sufficient shape to approve. Any hook is eligible per promoter's discretion, esp. ALT0 and ALT2. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Sammi Brie:, you going to finish this? --evrik (talk) 17:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
