- 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 Cielquiparle (talk) 04:39, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Farides Vaca
- ... that Farides Vaca had no political experience prior to being elected to the Bolivian Chamber of Deputies, having previously only worked as a university librarian? Source: Romero Ballivián 2018, pp. 609–610.
Improved to Good Article status by Krisgabwoosh (talk). Self-nominated at 10:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Farides Vaca; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- n
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
@Krisgabwoosh: Good article but I don't that think that the hook is that interesting. There have probably been plenty of politicians and maybe some Bolivian ones that had no political experience prior. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough. How's something along the same vein: Alt1: ... that as part of its strategy political renovation, National Convergence nominated a librarian to contest one of Bolivia's most competitive legislative districts? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke: Since the nomination has been stuck for a while now, could you look at ALT1? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:13, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
I'd say that the new hook is better. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke and Krisgabwoosh: We need to be able to find the hook in our article with a citation. #3b. i suggest for DYK purposes that the hook is inserted in the article with a citation directly following. Bruxton (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Bruxton: It is cited? It mentions she was a librarian, that her party hedged its bets on political renovation, and that it was in one of the closest districts. In fact all three claims are cited to the same source (Romero Ballivián 2018, pp. 609–610). Is it because portions of the hook are split between different parts of the article? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Krisgabwoosh: Scattered and hard to find. Perhaps for the purpose of DYK it can be said in a sentence and cited. This will make it easier for everyone along the way. Bruxton (talk) 23:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Bruxton: Pretty much everything included in the hook is included in the same paragraph in the article. The only thing omitted is the fact she's a librarian, which I honestly don't see a way of shoe-horning in. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 23:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Krisgabwoosh: Scattered and hard to find. Perhaps for the purpose of DYK it can be said in a sentence and cited. This will make it easier for everyone along the way. Bruxton (talk) 23:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Bruxton: It is cited? It mentions she was a librarian, that her party hedged its bets on political renovation, and that it was in one of the closest districts. In fact all three claims are cited to the same source (Romero Ballivián 2018, pp. 609–610). Is it because portions of the hook are split between different parts of the article? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke and Krisgabwoosh: We need to be able to find the hook in our article with a citation. #3b. i suggest for DYK purposes that the hook is inserted in the article with a citation directly following. Bruxton (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
