Template:Did you know nominations/Chris (Friday the 13th)

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: rejected by Szmenderowiecki (talk) 03:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Chris (Friday the 13th)

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Chris of Friday the 13th Part III (1982) was conceptualized after actress Amy Steel declined to reprise her role as Ginny from the prior film? Source:
  • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by The Baudelaire Fortune (talk). Self-nominated at 21:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC).

• Reviewing. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 08:38, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

New enough, long enough, earwig's copyvio check is alright, spot checks for close paraphrasing are ok. QPQ not required. The hook is cited inline and the offline source checks out. Is there a more interesting hook? FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 10:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

FacetsOfNonStickPans ALT1 ... that Dana Kimmell was bruised after falling from 18 feet while performing as Chris for Friday the 13th Part III? SL93 (talk) 23:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Waiting for a clarification over at the articles' talk page. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 02:47, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

FacetsOfNonStickPans I was assuming good faith because the book is in the article as an offline reference. I haven't read the book and I didn't know that it was available online. You should really be asking The Baudelaire Fortune. You should also, as the reviewer, now be comparing everything that is sourced to the book with the reference since you are able to. Plus, you found an error. A DYK article can't be promoted with any unverified content. SL93 (talk) 14:35, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

The 14th reference and the 21st reference are unreliable blogs. SL93 (talk) 14:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

It now looks to me like the way I phrased my comments above might sound rude, but I wasn't trying to be. I was only trying to inform. SL93 (talk) 23:32, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

SL93, it is good that these new issues have been identified at this stage itself. Now they can be dealt with accordingly. Irrespective of how this has turned out, thanks for suggesting the new hook.

The Baudelaire Fortune, please address the issues raised, comment here if there are any clarifications or once done. FacetsOfNonStickPans (talk) 04:24, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

The Baudelaire Fortune You have been editing and there has been talk page notices left on your talk page about the nomination. You have 7 days to fix the issues. SL93 (talk) 01:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

• The nominator has not edited since July 12th and despite multiple pings and talk page messages has been unable to respond. As the seven days given above has already passed, the nomination is now marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
• Closing note: At the moment of closure, the editor has not edited for 16 days and did not respond to multiple pings, the first of which was issued the day before the last edit was made anywhere (and which was not reacted upon). It appears from the user's contribution history that they have made pauses which in one case stretched for almost 1.5 months, and some are over 10 days long, but we cannot wait that much without any sort of reaction. Besides, a hook to promote was not agreed upon with the nominator, as none of them were found to be interesting enough. Therefore, I close this nomination as unsuccessful. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 03:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

References