Template:Did you know nominations/The Man Who Died Twice (novel)
- 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 22:39, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
The Man Who Died Twice (novel)
... that despite Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice having "more holes than a dodgy knitting pattern", it is one of the best-selling novels since records began?Source: "There is is [sic] not much more to the plot, which has more holes than a dodgy knitting pattern and his characters – aside from Elizabeth and her sidekick Joyce – are pretty flimsy." The Man Who Died Twice by Richard Osman review and "Richard Osman’s follow-up to The Thursday Murder Club, The Man Who Died Twice, has become one of the fastest-selling novels since records began." Richard Osman’s second book is one of the fastest-selling novels since records began- ALT1:
... that despite Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice having "paper-thin" characters, it is one of the best-selling novels since records began?Source: "He is essentially writing soap opera, and there is nothing wrong with that, but his characters are paper-thin." The Man Who Died Twice by Richard Osman review – is he a one-trick pony? and "Richard Osman’s follow-up to The Thursday Murder Club, The Man Who Died Twice, has become one of the fastest-selling novels since records began." Richard Osman’s second book is one of the fastest-selling novels since records began - ALT2:... that a reviewer said Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice has "more holes than a dodgy knitting pattern" but he "read it from cover to cover and enjoyed every minute"? Source: "There is is [sic] not much more to the plot, which has more holes than a dodgy knitting pattern and his characters – aside from Elizabeth and her sidekick Joyce – are pretty flimsy ... But despite the gripes, I read it from cover to cover and enjoyed every minute." The Man Who Died Twice by Richard Osman review
- ALT3:... that a reviewer said Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice has "more holes than a dodgy knitting pattern" but he "enjoyed every minute"? Source: See ALT2
- ALT4:
... that a former editor of Rolling Stone refused to review Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice despite it being one of the best-selling novels since records began?Source: "A leading books magazine is refusing to review Richard Osman’s new bestseller after its editor appealed to readers to seek out new titles beyond the latest blockbuster novels by the TV star-turned crime writer and Sally Rooney ... A former Rolling Stone editor, Mr Needham set up Strong Words in 2018 as a 'reliable and enjoyable literary magazine for people who buy books for pleasure.'" Richard Osman, Sally Rooney bestsellers have obliterated better novels, books magazine warns and "Richard Osman’s follow-up to The Thursday Murder Club, The Man Who Died Twice, has become one of the fastest-selling novels since records began." Richard Osman’s second book is one of the fastest-selling novels since records began- ALT4a:... that a former editor of Rolling Stone refused to review Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice? Source: "A leading books magazine is refusing to review Richard Osman’s new bestseller after its editor appealed to readers to seek out new titles beyond the latest blockbuster novels by the TV star-turned crime writer and Sally Rooney ... A former Rolling Stone editor, Mr Needham set up Strong Words in 2018 as a 'reliable and enjoyable literary magazine for people who buy books for pleasure.'" Richard Osman, Sally Rooney bestsellers have obliterated better novels, books magazine warns
- ALT4b:... that a top books magazine refused to review Richard Osman's The Man Who Died Twice? Source: See ALT4a
- ALT5:
... that Richard Osman called "celebrity writing a novel" "one of the worst phrases in the English language" but wrote a second one anyway?Source: "'I was very worried about that thing, "Oh it's a celebrity writing a novel", which, of course, is one of the worst phrases in the English language.'" Richard Osman on The Man Who Died Twice: "Celebrity novelist is the worst phrase in the English language"
- ALT1:
- Comment: Noting that I've highlighted Osman's authorship in all the hooks due to a hope that his celebrity will lead to more interest in the book's page.
Moved to mainspace by Sdrqaz (talk). Self-nominated at 00:16, 11 October 2021 (UTC).
This is just a comment, not a full review. I think ALT1 and 4 are misleading. The full quote from the source is It sold 114,202 copies in its first three days on sale last week (including pre-orders), according to Nielsen BookScan – a performance which the sales monitor said made it one of the fastest-selling novels since it began to track sales in the late 1990s.
So it's one of the fastest-selling novels since the records of one particular service began in the 90s... the current phrasing seems to imply by omission that it's one of the best-selling novels in literary history. Spicy (talk) 04:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- (Slightly surprised by how quick a comment came, given how my other nomination has languished ...) Spicy, I'm fine with a change from "best-selling" to "fastest-selling". As for the thing about Nielsen, it appears that it is considered an authoritative source for these things (rather like its sister company's Nielsen ratings in America). If we use the used by others standard, they've been used by The Guardian (obviously), the BBC, The Telegraph, The Times, and were called the "official book sales monitor" by The Guardian and The Huffington Post and has been widely accepted for years in the industry: it's not just another provider (perhaps akin to Gallup polls or Ann Selzer in American polling). I don't think I quoted The Guardian out of context, given it was verbatim from the text (they qualified the statistic later on in the article). Apparently this use of hard statistics when calculating book sales is a relatively recent phenomenon, strangely enough. It may be that as peculiar as the statistic is, it's an accurate one. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:22, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
- I have struck all hooks that use the term "best-selling novels since records began" because it's so far from true: the source is discussing first week sales in the UK (including preorders), while "best-selling", as Spicy notes, has to be assumed to be total sales ever without further context. The hooks as written are misleading and would have been pulled if promoted, so better to strike them now. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Also, thinking about it, the final four Harry Potter novels all sold millions of copies their first day on sale, so Nielsen is clearly on very shaky ground. Any kind of selling-related hook is going to need a better source with better context. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:37, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- If it'll prevent a thread at ERRORS (I had that joyous experience for shadow docket) I'll respect the decision. I've provided ALT4a and ALT4b in an attempt to salvage the underlying fact behind ALT4, but the other hooks are probably stronger. Sdrqaz (talk) 07:39, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- Also, thinking about it, the final four Harry Potter novels all sold millions of copies their first day on sale, so Nielsen is clearly on very shaky ground. Any kind of selling-related hook is going to need a better source with better context. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:37, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- I have struck all hooks that use the term "best-selling novels since records began" because it's so far from true: the source is discussing first week sales in the UK (including preorders), while "best-selling", as Spicy notes, has to be assumed to be total sales ever without further context. The hooks as written are misleading and would have been pulled if promoted, so better to strike them now. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:20, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
Full review needed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
This article is new enough and long enough. Approving ALT2, ALT3, ALT4a and ALT4b, but not ALT5 which I find a bit of a non-sequitor. I like ALT2 and ALT3 best. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral, and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done.No QPQ needed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:22, 28 October 2021 (UTC)- Thanks, Cwmhiraeth. Hopefully this beats Niz-Chavez v. Garland to the Main Page. I had proposed ALT5 because Osman's a celebrity author himself, but if the hook isn't as obvious as I hoped, then I suspect it won't fare as well on the Main Page. I also haven't done a QPQ, since I have fewer than five credits ... Sdrqaz (talk) 10:16, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
