Template:Did you know nominations/2012 SCO summit
- 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 PFHLai (talk) 07:04, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
2012 SCO summit
[edit]
Add caption text!
- ... that the 2012 SCO summit (host pictured) would bring Afghanistan and Turkey into the supranational union in some form?
- Reviewed: Samestate
- Comment: The summit concludes on the 7th, and i dont expect itll get posted soon, so we could change the hook if anything special happens (or this doesnt happn). There also is the logo for the summit, if that image were to be used
Created/expanded by Lihaas (talk). Self nom at 12:00, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
New enough and long enough. Now that the summit is over, the hook and some of the article needs to be put into the past tense and be updated (I'm thinking particularly about the 'Agenda' section in the article). The lead is very short, and needs to be more like a summary of the article (per MOS:LEAD, not really a failable issue, but it would improve the readability of the article greatly). There is uncited content in the 'Agenda' section (second paragraph), there should be a citation for the quote by Cheng Guoping. I think that's it. Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 13:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
- DoneLihaas (talk) 16:12, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
- We still need a source that says that Afghanistan and Turkey were brought into the union in some way, the current source predates the summit, and just says that this is on the agenda. If this didn't actually happen during the summit, maybe a different hook would be better. Quasihuman (talk • contribs) 16:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Good to go, but I suggest the following change to the hook to bring it into the past tense and be more specific (still falling well short of the 200 character mark):- Alt1... that the 2012 SCO summit (host pictured) brought Afghanistan and Turkey into the supranational union as observer and dialogue partner respectively.
Close paraphrasing concerns. Compare for example "the SCO would support a new security concept that would give its member states full control over maintaining its own interests, development trajectories according to each states' conditions and to counter "interventionism"" with "the SCO has advocated a new security concept that allows its member states to firmly maintain their interests, explore development paths that are suited to their individual conditions and fight against "interventionism"". Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- better?Lihaas (talk) 02:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Better, but not there yet. That example is still a bit close, and that was an example only - other sources need to be checked please, as on a quick look current FN 17 is also quite close. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- 17 is explicitly cited as coing from the source (hence the bullet points not prose). But feel free to help/change to make it sound
- See this?Lihaas (talk) 11:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not the bullets, the material below that. Compare: "regulating the SCO response mechanism to regional security threats" vs "regulations concerning the SCO's mechanism of response to regional security threats". Nikkimaria (talk) 18:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- Proper nounds and quotes left, but totall redid the restLihaas (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- Getting there, but have you looked at the other sources for similar problems? For example, compare "an inter-governmental agreement on road transport is due to be signed, along with the continuation of discussions on the establishment of a financing safeguard mechanism and a regional development bank" with "an inter-governmental agreement on road transport will be signed while discussions on establishing a project financing safeguard mechanism and a regional development bank will continue". Nikkimaria (talk) 04:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Done, and wholeclae reviewedLihaas (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- Much better, and good enough. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
- Done, and wholeclae reviewedLihaas (talk) 23:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- Getting there, but have you looked at the other sources for similar problems? For example, compare "an inter-governmental agreement on road transport is due to be signed, along with the continuation of discussions on the establishment of a financing safeguard mechanism and a regional development bank" with "an inter-governmental agreement on road transport will be signed while discussions on establishing a project financing safeguard mechanism and a regional development bank will continue". Nikkimaria (talk) 04:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
- Proper nounds and quotes left, but totall redid the restLihaas (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not the bullets, the material below that. Compare: "regulating the SCO response mechanism to regional security threats" vs "regulations concerning the SCO's mechanism of response to regional security threats". Nikkimaria (talk) 18:16, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- Better, but not there yet. That example is still a bit close, and that was an example only - other sources need to be checked please, as on a quick look current FN 17 is also quite close. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- better?Lihaas (talk) 02:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)