Template:Did you know nominations/Dick Helander

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 Allen3 talk 11:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Withdrawn by nominator

Dick Helander edit

Created by BabbaQ (talk), GoingBatty (talk), Werldwayd (talk), and Launchballer (talk). Nominated by BabbaQ (talk) at 19:19, 31 March 2014 (UTC).

  • Article is new enough (created 27 March), it is a bit on the short side, but including the bibliography the treshold of 1500 characters is reached. The article is neutral and seems to cite sources, but references one and two don't seem to lead to any useful information that back up the text. Other sources seem fine. The current hook complies mostly with the standards but seems boring considering the rest of the text, I'm sure you can come up with something concerning his case and history (including his innocence!). QPQ is done and image is good.
Some further notes; this sentence is unclear: On 22 December 1953, Helander was indicted in connection with fake letters that he had been sent to Strängnäs congregation saying that Helander should be chosen as the next bishop. Especially this part: that he had been sent. I'm not sure what it is supposed to mention. Also, Helander was a bishop, but of which exact church/religion? You might also might be able to say something more on his time as a professor, based on the Swedish wiki page I see there is more info.
Its applaudable to mention Launchballer for his edits, however they don't seem valuable enough to mention for DYK.
Overall: some things need to be fixed before this one can continue. Crispulop (talk) 22:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I am withdrawing this nomination. I will take a look at the concerns later in the coming week but I simply think it is better for the article to not appear at DYK. --BabbaQ (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Withdrawn by author. Crispulop (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)