Jump to content

Talk:Art Rooney Jr.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 Bruxton (talk00:23, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:03, 17 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Art Rooney Jr.; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Article is new enough (submitted within 6 days of creation), long enough (4785 characters), well sourced with inline citations, neutral in explaining some family/professional drama. No apparent copyvio; Earwig flags 41.5% similarity with one source, but it turns out to be because the article includes some direct quotes from Art Rooney Jr.'s book. QPQ is done. Hook checks out and is cited within the article and is interesting. (Still confusing about Art Rooney Jr. vs. Art Rooney II; curious if Jr. himself had anything to say about having the same name, etc....but that's not a show stopper for DYK.) Cielquiparle (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle and BeanieFan11: "Over a six year span"? id that needed as a qualifier or does the hook stand alone? Bruxton (talk) 21:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't add "six-year span". It changes the meaning. Cielquiparle (talk) 01:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Art Rooney Jr./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: WikiOriginal-9 (talk · contribs) 06:27, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Notes

[edit]
  • added marine and stage actor cats
  • hmm, those sources dont actually say he was PR Director from 1961 to 1964

That's all I think. Nice work. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 06:27, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All points have been addressed. Passing the article. Nice work! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 03:24, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]