Template:Did you know nominations/The Death of Asher and Yonatan Palmer

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: rejected by — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:49, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Several issues below

Death of Asher and Yonatan Palmer

(

)

... that American citizens, Asher Palmer and his infant Yonatan, were killed in a stoning attack by two Palestinians in the West Bank in 2011?

Created/expanded by AnkhMorpork (talk). Self nom at 23:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

- I think it's good. The prose is long enough and uses reliable references, and was created in the past 5 days. I'll make some minor charges though in regard to wording, date format, etc, but on the whole it looks good. --Activism1234 00:59, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Hook is not neutral as the event didn't occur in Israel. Change "Israel" to "Israeli-occuped West Bank".--Frederico1234 (talk) 18:50, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
: In addition to POV issues, article written in pidgin, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 15:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
I note that the West Bank naming issue has been fixed. The English looks ok to me. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:08, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

And I note that you haven't read the article before commenting/arbitrating: "one of them charged with a with another attempted murder" - good English? Vivid present is ill-advised other than for drama; could go on ad nauseam. As for neutrality, how about we start with the previous reviewer's comment re the hook; perhaps a less finger-pointy and baby's blood-lusting alt1 might work, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 23:14, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

That small grammar mistake has been fixed. Thanks for pointing it out. --Activism1234 04:30, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that American citizens Asher and Yonatan Palmer were killed in a stoning attack in the Israeli-occupied West Bank in 2011?

Hooks do not need to summarize an article or point out every article. A hook can be whatever an editor feels would make for a good hook - time, date, location, etc, do not need to be given. If there was a cited sentence that Yonatan Palme was born 4 months early and in perfectly good health, and AnkhMorpork felt that's interesting enough for a hook, that'd be perfectly acceptable as well, if that's what he wants it to be. It's best to avoid hooks with wording designed to be intentionally politically contentious, as no one is really in the mood for another pointless argument about the wording here... If Ankh wants to say it happened in the West Bank, which isn't even necessary, he/she certainly would not be lying. Again, not every detail is given - we don't need to say the geographic coordinates of the West Bank in a hook either, if the nominator feels it doesn't add anything to the hook. --Activism1234 04:30, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Since the location is a source of contention, I shall omit it from the hook.

ALT2: ... that American citizens, Asher Palmer and his infant Yonatan, were killed in a stoning attack by two Palestinians in 2011? Ankh.Morpork 16:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

. Too many problems.

I am more concerned with the structure of the introduction than the hook. If the intro isn't good, then the article should not be a DYK.

The first problem is the name of the article. It should be "Deaths of......", not "Death of......".
The first sentence is very badly written. It does not state accurately what took place, as reported later within the text of the article.

"The Death of Asher and Yonatan Palmer was a stoning attack by two Palestinians that killed Asher, aged 25, and his one-year-old son, Yonatan after their car overturned on the highway near the Israeli settlement of Kiryat Arba in the West Bank on 23 September 2011."

1. This says that it was an attack that killed two people AFTER their car overturned. What this means is that the car overturned, and then they were stoned to death.

When I read the article, I discovered that a stone was hurled threw the windscreen of a moving vehicle from a vehicle travelling the opposite direct, causing injury to the driver, resulting in the car leaving the road.

There is no indication in the article that the "stoning attack" occurred after the car left the road.

2. The third problem is that the deaths that the title of the article refers to the death/s. You cannot write that the deaths were the attack. The deaths were caused by the attack, but they were not the "attack". It is simply an inaccurate way of stating the facts.

The problem here is the structure of a successful definition. Try:

"The deaths of Asher and Yonatan Palmer were events which took place in the Israeli-occupied West Bank in 2011, in which a man and his infant son died as the result of a stoning attack. In the attack, a stone was hurled through the window of the car that Asher Palmer was driving, causing him to lose control of the vehicle, which overturned. The attack was perpetrated by two Palestinian men etc etc etc.

The notion that a hook can be irrelevant to the main subject of the article e.g. Yonatan Palmer was born 4 months early and in perfectly good health, is nonsense. It is particularly important in the case of a sensitive, recent matter that it is stated right, and relevantly.

Amandajm (talk) 06:18, 6 September 2012 (UTC)