Template:Did you know nominations/Salinger v. Random House

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) 22:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Salinger v. Random House edit

(

)

... that in Salinger v. Random House the judges found "resembling a lifeless rodent" was too close to "like a dead rat"?

Reviewed: The Taiwan Oyster, Leonora Moore

Created/expanded by Aymatth2 (talk). Self nom at 02:32, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Interesting and original hook! Article length, expansion and age are fine, and sources are accepted. But it would need a precision about the topic of the case (for example, "about copyright infringement"). --Bryan P. C. C. (talk) 16:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I sort of like enigmatic hooks, but maybe it is unfair to our readers to sucker them into looking at a dry and long-winded article like this. How about ALT1 below? Aymatth2 (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that the judges in Salinger v. Random House found that "resembling a lifeless rodent" infringed on the copyrighted expression "like a dead rat"?

Yes, that's better. It makes the hook easier to understand without revealing too much of the article. --Bryan P. C. C. (talk) 16:23, 18 June 2012 (UTC)