Template:Did you know nominations/Jackie Wallace

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Jackie Wallace edit

(

)

... ~~that Jackie Wallace appeared in two Super Bowls and then became homeless?~~ [1]

Reviewed: ~~IOU~~Template:Did you know nominations/Scouting/USA
Comment: Pre-expansion version was 632 bytes.

5x expanded by Muboshgu (talk) and Mardus (talk). Nominated by Muboshgu (talk) at 05:21, 5 February 2018 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image eligibility:

Freely licensed:
Used in article:
Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Review is incomplete - please fill in the "status" field

Looks good, just need that QPQ. epicgenius (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

I'll get too that shortly. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:08, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Any progress on the QPQ? epicgenius (talk) 15:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Gotta get off the computer and go to work now. I'll hopefully do it by this afternoon, at the latest this weekend. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
QPQ is done. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

This is now good to go. epicgenius (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

No, this is a disgraceful exposure of someone who has fallen on hard times. Why would any of you think this to be appropriate for DYK??? The Rambling Man (talk) 23:00, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not at home in this part of Wikipedia, and am possibly not entitled to an opinion here, but I must protest too. Are the negative virtues ticked above all a DYK needs? Article not too old, not too short, not copyvio, etc? The article is sad — some BLPs are, because life sometimes is — I'm not complaining about the article — but putting it on DYK? And with that cold-hearted hook? Now imagine it was you, or a friend or relative of yours. Well? Is the hook still "interesting"? Bishonen | talk 23:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC).

- "Disgraceful exposure"? Have you read this? – Muboshgu (talk) 00:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
  - Write something better please. It's clear that the current hook is grim and unworthy, and in your position, you should know better. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:43, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
    - There is absolutely nothing wrong with this hook. No BLP violation, nothing inappropriate at all. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Per the discussion at WT:DYK, we finally have an agreed-upon hook for this nomination, as follows:

ALT6: ... that Jackie Wallace told the coach of the Los Angeles Rams to "kiss his ass" for failing to field him in Super Bowl XIV, his final NFL game?

So we just need somebody to verify it. Epicgenius? Gatoclass (talk) 16:14, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
- This one is good to go. epicgenius (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2018 (UTC)