Template:Did you know nominations/Andy Mineo

Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of Andy Mineo's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC).

Andy Mineo, Andy Mineo discography, Formerly Known edit

Created/expanded by 3family6 (talk). Self nom at 22:55, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

  • I have only reviewed the article "Formerly Known". That article was created on 14 December 2012 and completed on 18 December, which means it satisfies the requirement that it was not more than five days old when nominated. It is of sufficient length and appears sufficiently referenced. The image is not free but appears to have a valid fair-use justification. The hook is of appropriate length and is referenced by footnote 2. — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
  • OK, I've just nominated another article so I'll review Andy Mineo discography. The article was created on 14 December 2012 and on 17 December after work on it was completed it was 1,598 characters in length which makes it sufficiently long. The article appears to be adequately referenced. — SMUconlaw (talk) 17:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Review still needed for the Andy Mineo article, including the hook in relation to the article. The other two articles have been reviewed. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
The facts in the hook are only referred to in "Formerly Known". — SMUconlaw (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I honestly don't know what the procedure is here. Does the hook have to be in all three articles for them to be nominated together? I think the Bubba Watson appearance is too specific to be mentioned on the discography page, though it might be worth including on the Andy Mineo page, though even there it is a highly specific detail.--¿3family6 contribs 20:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I think it's fine if the hook is referenced in at least one of the nominated articles. — SMUconlaw (talk) 10:36, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
  • It only needs to be in one of the articles. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
If I understand correctly, if the nominator just removes the bold formatting for Andy Mineo in the hook, this one is good to go. TheBlueCanoe 14:57, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Well, I'd hoped that that article would be approved as well.--¿3family6 contribs 17:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
  • One article still needs a review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:47, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but there is rampant close paraphrasing in the biography section of the Andy Mineo article, from this source - to the point that I am strongly inclined to disqualify this submission outright. There is a huge amount of time wasted on trying to resolve close paraphrasing issues at T:TDYK, I'm increasingly of the view that articles with substantial paraphrasing problems should be declined quickly. Gatoclass (talk) 06:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, the close paraphrasing is still rampant. I suggest you use WP:Duplication detector on that source and the Andy Mineo article to find all the problem spots; right now it shows a 25-word phrase that occurs in both source and article, and well over a dozen significant identical phrases between six and twelve words long, some of which are actually longer close paraphrases when you consider minor formatting or word changes before and/or after the identical section. As it is, this is unacceptable. There's also the statement that Mineo's first album will be out in January 2013. It's February, so either it's out or it isn't. ("Isn't" appears to be the correct answer, as both the article and the discography also list the album release with an April date, which conflicts with the January info. The discography actually says "Released: April 16, 2013", which strikes me as WP:CRYSTAL, not to mention that an earlier release announcement has already proven inaccurate.) BlueMoonset (talk) 17:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • The January thing I missed when updated the article to reflect the new release date. I have deleted that sentence. On the discography page, I did not make the edit that added Heroes for Sale and put in the April 16 release date, but I have rectified that by putting in "Scheduled for." I'll get to work on the close paraphrasing issue, thank you for offering me the abouve resource.--¿3family6 contribs 13:46, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I've done some more work on condensing the article content and have reworded the duplicate sentence.--¿3family6 contribs 19:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
  • There's still significant similarity with that source, though: compare for example "he started recording in his mother's house while in middle school, using his birthday money to buy equipment, and he eventually started selling studio time out of his closet" with "While in middle school, he began recording in his mom’s house and was buying new pieces of equipment with birthday money. Eventually, he started selling studio time out of his closet", or "He also leads weekly small groups and men's groups at his apartment and travels on the weekends to minister" with "He is also leading weekly small groups and men’s groups at his apartment, traveling on the weekends to minister". Nikkimaria (talk) 04:14, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm working on how to re-write some of the article. I'm having a little trouble figuring out how to retain the information without paraphrazing the source. I may just resort to quotations for some of it.--¿3family6 contribs 14:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I've done some more work. The duplication detector is mostly picking up small two or three word phrases, I don't know if that's a problem or not.--¿3family6 contribs 15:09, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
  • If duplication detector were picking up only two- or three-word phrases, it wouldn't be a problem. Instead, the comparison shows several phrases each of nine and eight words, including from both of the examples Nikkimaria listed above: over a dozen phrases of significant length remain. Since neither of those examples were adequately dealt with in this third attempt to end the extremely close paraphrasing, I'm regretfully calling an end to this review. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:58, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Per discussion on my talk page, the two articles with no close paraphrasing may be worth putting on the main page (but no link to the Mineo article) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:05, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
  • That's fine with me. I wish I could have solved the close-paraphrasing problem, but as I wrote the article I've been unable to distance myself from it enough to properly handle the problem. Unless someone else tackles that article, this is the best option.--¿3family6 contribs 12:55, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm also busy with college, so that doesn't help things.--¿3family6 contribs 12:56, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Glad we could resolve this satisfactorily. I reviewed the hook and the articles "Formerly Known" and "Andy Mineo discography" in January (see above) and found them to be OK. Made some changes to the hook (including removing the link to "Andy Mineo") – see below. (Should "Michael Jackson" be linked? I added it. It's a link to the pop star, not the song.) — SMUconlaw (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
ALT 1: ... that professional golfer Bubba Watson was featured in the song "Michael Jackson" by hip hop artist Andy Mineo from his album Formerly Known?
  • I removed the link to Michael Jackson as it is not strictly relevant and a bit misleading - it looks like a link to the song.--¿3family6 contribs 20:15, 26 February 2013 (UTC)