Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Ginger: The Life and Death of Albert Goodwin

< Template:Did you know nominations
The following discussion 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 19:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Ginger: The Life and Death of Albert Goodwin edit

(
)

Created/expanded by My76Strat (talk). Self nom at 15:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

  • I'm sorry, but this article appears to contain about three sentences pertaining to the topic, which is a book about Goodwin. The rest is just a rehash of Goodwin's career, which can already be found at the Albert Goodwin page itself. This one falls under insufficient coverage of topic. Gatoclass (talk) 12:29, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. I'll have to review some GAs about books to see the technique. Thanks. My76Strat (talk) 14:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
A review/reception section would help with coverage. Here's a couple reviews you could summarize:
I'll try help out with this, quite busy though. Goodwin's story is very interesting. The Interior (Talk) 18:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
I only just noticed your comments here, I was not monitoring for activity because I thought the nomination had been rejected. In any regard, I appreciate the insight you have left for me to consider, and I will be incorporating your advice directly. Thanks again. My76Strat (talk) 06:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
BTW, I have Highbeam access, I'll be looking there for more sources for sure. My76Strat (talk) 07:03, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
That's up to Gatoclass, but noms are often reconsidered after a rewrite. One important note: I removed one sentence of yours as it was almost verbatim from the source per WP:PARAPHRASE. Strat, can you double check your content here to make sure there are no other instances of close paraphrasing? The Interior (Talk) 19:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll definitely have a look. Right away. My76Strat (talk) 20:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
I struggled a bit with that sentence. I felt I had achieved a good paraphrase but I would agree to err on the side of caution. I'm sure it could be copy-edited to achieve a better phrasing, but that depends on if you feel it is relevant content. Thanks for being diligent. My76Strat (talk) 20:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
You have to be careful you're not borrowing the author's "creative expression", in this case, his sentence structure. Swapping in some synonyms usually isn't enough. You need to express the information in your own construction. A good rule of thumb would be to place yourself in the author's shoes: would you recognize that sentence is yours? As to whether it's needed at all, I'd say Leier is exaggerating a fair bit there. Goodwin isn't a household name, even to those on the left, and this conspiracy theory is nowhere near as famous as JFK's is, even in BC. It's really an opinion, and not a terribly germane one to the topic of the book. The Interior (Talk) 21:17, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
As the original hook is based around Goodwin and not the book, how about:
  • A much improved article. I have added The Interior to the credit list as he has obviously made a substantial contribution. ALT 1 verified. Gatoclass (talk) 12:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
    When I noticed from my watchlist this DYK got the appreciative tick, I came here to comment that I felt The Interior was definitely more deserving of credit than me, my nomination for all purposes failed the criteria; and he or she resurrected the article, and showed me more than a thing or two about critical writing. I was glad to see it was already known. My76Strat (talk) 12:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I've asked The Interior to comment on a technical aspect of the modified hook, which I mostly like much better. I just want a solid consideration given to the accuracy of calling the work a biography. If the nomination can remain here until the prompt answer is given, I'd like to keep it here the extra minute. To get it right. Thank you. My76Strat (talk) 13:15, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
I decided to drop a suggestion for The Interior to consider. Regarding my changes, if it's not accurately a biography, the work is thoroughly referenced as creative non-fiction, I think it's important to emphasize the Canadian significance of Goodwin. and the he is unquestionably a leading figure. It gives the allure of a "Canadian Jimmy Hoffa" which will help the American reader who will not likely have any name association with Goodwin that the suggested hook will bridge. IMO, My76Strat (talk) 13:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
No surprise, but I like Alt 1 better ;) The refs do use "biography" to describe the work (Both CM and BC studies anyway); any historical work that focuses on one individual is pretty much a bio, "creative non-fiction" is more of a style or treatment that can be applied to any non-fiction work. Also, not really a fan of "leading" - it's a vague superlative, and has more of a sports vibe to it. But either way, I'm happy. Hadn't thought about the Hoffa similarities before, but they're definitely there. The Interior (Talk) 23:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
I like calling it a biography better as well, I just wanted your reassurance that it was fully accurate. Whether or not you end up with Alt 1.5 is entirely your call. But I still think "a leading Canadian labour activist" is a better summary than simply "a labour activist", but I'm good leaving that with you. Thanks, My76Strat (talk) 23:33, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I added "book" to the ALT 2 hook for clarity, otherwise the alt is supported by sources and either alt is fine by me, though perhaps you should ask The Interior if he has a preference. Gatoclass (talk) 12:08, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm good with either. Let the promoter decide ;) The Interior (Talk) 17:57, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Ginger:_The_Life_and_Death_of_Albert_Goodwin&oldid=1021732287"