- 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 Yoninah (talk) 13:23, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Gao Yubao
- ... that despite being nearly illiterate, Chinese soldier Gao Yubao wrote an autobiographical novel with more than six million copies printed, with the help of a ghostwriter? Source: Modern Chinese Literature and multiple Chinese sources cited inline.
- ALT1:... that Gao Yubao's autobiographical novel made the semi-fictionalized "Zhou the Flayer" one of the most famous evil landlords in Communist China? Source: The Killing Wind and multiple Chinese sources cited inline.
- Reviewed: Nástup
Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 01:24, 13 December 2019 (UTC).
Article is new enough and long enough. It is within policy, with no copyright violations that I can detect. It is appropriately sourced. QPQ complete. I find the original hook really interesting, but I'm doubtful of its accuracy; everyone is illiterate before they begin to learn to read and write. If Gao learned before he wrote, then surely he was no longer illiterate when writing the book? Could you tweak the hook to perhaps say that he was illiterate until adulthood? Vanamonde (Talk) 13:15, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- ALT2:... that while learning to read and write as an adult, Gao Yubao wrote an autobiographical novel with more than six million copies printed? Source: Modern Chinese Literature and multiple Chinese sources cited inline. --evrik (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- ALT3:... that while overcoming adult illiteracy, Gao Yubao wrote an autobiographical novel with more than six million copies printed? Source: Modern Chinese Literature and multiple Chinese sources cited inline. --evrik (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
@Vanamonde and Zanhe: --evrik (talk) 17:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Vanamonde93: Thanks for your review and sorry about the late response (I took a break from Wikipedia during the holidays). The sources make it clear that he was still nearly illiterate when writing the book, and a ghostwriter wrote a large part of it. @Evrik: Thanks for proposing the new hooks, they look fine to me. -Zanhe (talk) 21:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
The original hook is good to go; thanks for the adjustments. AGF on non-English sources. It's still more interesting than the other factoid, and is more grammatical than the proposed alternatives (thanks for proposing them, nonetheless). Vanamonde (Talk) 22:10, 13 January 2020 (UTC)