Template:Did you know nominations/What Is Democracy?
- 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 SL93 (talk) 23:37, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
What is Democracy?
edit- ... that The Allegory of Good and Bad Government is a discussion point in What Is Democracy?? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT1:... that What Is Democracy? interviews people from barbers to philosophers? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- Comment: The primary hook fact can be sourced from the LA Times article. The ALT1 fact can be taken from The New Yorker or The Intercept.
Converted from a redirect by StudiesWorld (talk). Self-nominated at 20:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC).
- I should note that this was my first DYK nom for QPQ review. PublicWorld (talk) 18:04, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
-
The article is new enough and long enough, neutral, and cites reliable sources inline (excepting sentences previously sourced to IMDb, which will need to be replaced with better citations). No copyright problems Earwig or I could detect. No QPQ required and the hook is within 200 characters.
- However, the hooks aren't quite up to standard. ALT0 is not terribly interesting to a general audience, even if they know what The Allegory of Good and Bad Government is. It's an unsurprising statement of fact. ALT1 is far better but still has some problems. Firstly, the documentary features a barber (singular), not many. Secondly, it's not surprising a documentary on the definition of democracy would feature interviews with philosophers (experts, after all, at defining these broad terms), but The New Yorker mentions trauma surgeons, a poet, and refugees as subjects, all of which would be much more interesting to include in the hook. Secondly, a documentary cannot interview a person; it should read something like "In documentary X, John Doe interviews ..."
- This isn't strictly in the DYK criteria, but the article should have a reception section; it's a basic component of film articles. Also, there's no need to provide inline citations for the summary, as the work itself is implied to be cited. – Teratix ₵ 13:55, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- Teratix, Thanks for the feedback. The reason that I included inline citations for the summary is that I saw the film at a screening and therefore couldn't refer to it while writing the summary, so I primarily relied on sources. Should I remove the inline citations? Looking at other Reception sections, they seem to focus on box office statistics. However, I can't find those for this film. Would it be acceptable to only discuss its award nominations and media reviews? Here's a rephrasing:
- ALT2:... that What Is Democracy? interviews trauma surgeons and refugees about the meaning of Democracy? StudiesWorld (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- Although I will note, that I like the barber's inclusion. StudiesWorld (talk) 14:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- I realized that I didn't address your other concern:
- ALT3:... that, in What Is Democracy?, Astra Taylor interviews trauma surgeons and refugees about the meaning of democracy? StudiesWorld (talk) 17:41, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- Although I will note, that I like the barber's inclusion. StudiesWorld (talk) 14:12, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- Teratix, Thanks for the feedback. The reason that I included inline citations for the summary is that I saw the film at a screening and therefore couldn't refer to it while writing the summary, so I primarily relied on sources. Should I remove the inline citations? Looking at other Reception sections, they seem to focus on box office statistics. However, I can't find those for this film. Would it be acceptable to only discuss its award nominations and media reviews? Here's a rephrasing:
- It is fine to include a reception section discussing reviews and awards even if you can't find box office statistics. The hook still reads slightly awkwardly because "democracy" appears twice. Maybe rephrase or replace the title with "a 2019 documentary" or similar? – Teratix ₵ 12:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Teratix, I apologize for the delay. I have added a critical reception section, but I'm not really sure how it is best done, so it may need cleaning up. StudiesWorld (talk) 15:06, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
- Excellent! I think the article is fine now, but the hook just needs some slight tweaks to reach its full potential. I agree with you that the barber's inclusion was very interesting, so add them to the front or back of the list of interview subjects in the hook. See also my previous advice for replacing the title to make the hook read smoothly. – Teratix ₵ 13:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Teratix, how about:
- ALT4:... that in a 2019 documentary, Astra Taylor inteviews trauma surgeons, refugees, and a barber about the meaning of democracy?StudiesWorld (talk) 15:57, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Excellent! I think the article is fine now, but the hook just needs some slight tweaks to reach its full potential. I agree with you that the barber's inclusion was very interesting, so add them to the front or back of the list of interview subjects in the hook. See also my previous advice for replacing the title to make the hook read smoothly. – Teratix ₵ 13:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
