Template:Did you know nominations/Tommy Tucker (squirrel)
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 01:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tommy Tucker (squirrel)
[edit]
Tommy Tucker in a fetching outfit
- ... that a pet squirrel wearing women's clothes became famous during World War II, selling war bonds and entertaining children?
- ALT1:... that LIFE Magazine published a feature on an Eastern gray squirrel, including a gallery of portraits by Nina Leen?
ALT2:... that a transvestite squirrel sold World War II war bonds?- Comment: Created in my sandbox and moved to mainspace on same day (Oct. 2). Yay squirrels.
Created by Daughterphoenix (talk). Self-nominated at 01:56, 4 October 2016 (UTC).
- This is a delightful story. I've done a severe copyedit. I've cropped the image to just one sub-image for use in the nomination. EEng 08:28, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
. Fascinating, compelling, and cute. Morganfitzp (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
@Morganfitzp: you should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been met. Yoninah (talk) 20:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: @Daughterphoenix: @Morganfitzp: @EEng: Morganfitzp hasn't done it so I will; article was new enough when nominated, long enough, well-cited, checks free of copyvios, QPQ not required because nominator has no credits, hook 1 is best, avoiding transvestite nonsense or possible undue attention to Life, and verified by footnotes 1 and 2. One part is tagged for request for clarification; not sure if that's needed since refs mention the squirrel lived in a trailer. Great story, PD image. Good to go IMO Ribbet32 (talk) 08:03, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Why is it transvestite nonsense? It's a male in female clothing, a point brought out explicitly in the article. And it'll get zillion clicks. However, on further consideration I'll submit:
- ALT3:... that a cross-dressing squirrel sold World War II war bonds?
- I'd like to know the opinion of the nominator, Daughterphoenix. EEng 08:14, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Wearing clothing is a human characteristic. An animal can't be a transvestite, or a cross-dresser, really. Run the pic of the squirrel, it'll get clicks anyway. Ribbet32 (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- This is DYK, not a dictionary. EEng 17:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Odd reply if you don't mind me saying so. Our WP:DICTIONARY policy has rarely been invoked as licence to use words incorrectly. DYK asks for hooks to be catchy and interesting, but also accurate. Ribbet32 (talk) 17:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well for that matter, M-W defines portrait as "a painting, drawing, or photograph of a person that usually only includes the person's head and shoulders", so since these photos are neither of a person, nor of the head and shoulders only (if squirrels even have shoulders – maybe they have withers or something) the use of that word, in the hook you approved, is a double fail. Shall we choose a substitute word, or is it dawning on you how silly you're being? EEng 18:15, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- My choice was Hook 1 " that a pet squirrel wearing women's clothes became famous during World War II, selling war bonds and entertaining children?" Ribbet32 (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Clearly a lot of the problem here is that you don't have much DYK experience. No one would interpret "Hook 1" as meaning the originally proposed hook (a.k.a. ALT0) but rather (obviously) ALT1.
- My choice was Hook 1 " that a pet squirrel wearing women's clothes became famous during World War II, selling war bonds and entertaining children?" Ribbet32 (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well for that matter, M-W defines portrait as "a painting, drawing, or photograph of a person that usually only includes the person's head and shoulders", so since these photos are neither of a person, nor of the head and shoulders only (if squirrels even have shoulders – maybe they have withers or something) the use of that word, in the hook you approved, is a double fail. Shall we choose a substitute word, or is it dawning on you how silly you're being? EEng 18:15, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Odd reply if you don't mind me saying so. Our WP:DICTIONARY policy has rarely been invoked as licence to use words incorrectly. DYK asks for hooks to be catchy and interesting, but also accurate. Ribbet32 (talk) 17:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- This is DYK, not a dictionary. EEng 17:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Wearing clothing is a human characteristic. An animal can't be a transvestite, or a cross-dresser, really. Run the pic of the squirrel, it'll get clicks anyway. Ribbet32 (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Why is it transvestite nonsense? It's a male in female clothing, a point brought out explicitly in the article. And it'll get zillion clicks. However, on further consideration I'll submit:
- Now that we're clear on that... Tommy isn't wearing, as you say, "women's clothes", because obviously they're not women's clothes but rather squirrel clothes; also, a squirrel can't sell war bonds because his little paws are ill-adapted to the paperwork involved. I hope at long last my point is getting through: prissy fussiness isn't helpful when considering hooks. EEng 18:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think we need to get insulting. Please chill. If I had meant Alt 1, I would have said Alt 1. And there has been a lot of emphasis on accuracy in hooks lately. What is wrong with the original hook? Would ALT4 "that a male squirrel wearing women's clothes became famous during World War II, selling war bonds and entertaining children?" satisfy you? Ribbet32 (talk) 19:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- No insult, but I'm having a hard time getting across that you're bringing too much gravitas to a squirrel in a dress. I never said there's anything wrong with ALT0, but you said there's something wrong with ALTs 2 and 3, and there's not. They're both acceptable. I just happen to think ALT3 is punchier than ALT0. ALT4 just continues the fussing that cross-dressing is somehow wrong. EEng 19:20, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Chiming in here, I think I'd just go with "squirrel wearing women's clothes" and running with the funny picture. I don't think it is much (if at all) less catchy than "cross-dressing" or "transvestite" and I can see how some people might be ....unimpressed if we use either of the latter terms. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- I think cross-dressing rodents should all come out of the closet (or at least their dresses should). EEng 02:00, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- I saw the discussion about this at EEng's talk page, so I looked here. I agree with Cas Liber's view. And frankly, I think that it's "fussy" to argue that the clothes are squirrel clothes and not women's clothes. --Tryptofish (talk) 14:57, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- I think cross-dressing rodents should all come out of the closet (or at least their dresses should). EEng 02:00, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Chiming in here, I think I'd just go with "squirrel wearing women's clothes" and running with the funny picture. I don't think it is much (if at all) less catchy than "cross-dressing" or "transvestite" and I can see how some people might be ....unimpressed if we use either of the latter terms. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:48, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- No insult, but I'm having a hard time getting across that you're bringing too much gravitas to a squirrel in a dress. I never said there's anything wrong with ALT0, but you said there's something wrong with ALTs 2 and 3, and there's not. They're both acceptable. I just happen to think ALT3 is punchier than ALT0. ALT4 just continues the fussing that cross-dressing is somehow wrong. EEng 19:20, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think we need to get insulting. Please chill. If I had meant Alt 1, I would have said Alt 1. And there has been a lot of emphasis on accuracy in hooks lately. What is wrong with the original hook? Would ALT4 "that a male squirrel wearing women's clothes became famous during World War II, selling war bonds and entertaining children?" satisfy you? Ribbet32 (talk) 19:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Now that we're clear on that... Tommy isn't wearing, as you say, "women's clothes", because obviously they're not women's clothes but rather squirrel clothes; also, a squirrel can't sell war bonds because his little paws are ill-adapted to the paperwork involved. I hope at long last my point is getting through: prissy fussiness isn't helpful when considering hooks. EEng 18:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
