Template:Did you know nominations/Vegard Lysvoll
- 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 Allen3 talk 17:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Vegard Lysvoll
[edit]
... that Vegard Lysvoll (pictured) scored 30 goals when his club Tromsdalen UIL sat a new Norwegian record with more than 100 goals during the season?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/White Foxes
- Comment: Nominated way too late (6 days late), but I'm in "vacation-mood", and given the lack of new nominations, I'll let the reviewer decide if this could pass
Created by Bj94 (talk), Mentoz86 (talk). Nominated by Mentoz86 (talk) at 21:31, 11 July 2013 (UTC).
Long enough, fully referenced. Pic fine. I'm letting it pass despite the late submission, since everything else is good, and there are so many problematic article articles that we've given extra time to. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
The article is not new enough. SL93 (talk) 08:09, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, it wasn't nominated in time, something I've already stated in the comment. Hawkeye7 accepted the nomination despite it being nominated too late: "I'm letting it pass despite the late submission..." The supplementary guideline D9 states that the "Five days old limit should be strictly enforced only if there is a large backlog of hooks" - if you believe there is currently a large backlog you should state that in your rejection, if not I think you should re-do your rejection of this hook. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- There is a large backlog. There are not many hooks being promoted and not many reviews happening which is why the DYK template is now only updated every 12 hours. SL93 (talk) 10:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, it wasn't nominated in time, something I've already stated in the comment. Hawkeye7 accepted the nomination despite it being nominated too late: "I'm letting it pass despite the late submission..." The supplementary guideline D9 states that the "Five days old limit should be strictly enforced only if there is a large backlog of hooks" - if you believe there is currently a large backlog you should state that in your rejection, if not I think you should re-do your rejection of this hook. Mentoz86 (talk) 10:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
That was the reason. SL93 (talk) 10:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Based on 5-day Not Exactly, and there have been other incidents here at DYK where the time limit was overlooked. — Maile (talk) 16:11, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed that the exception is warranted in this case, particularly as the creator is someone new to DYK and relatively new to Wikipedia. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
The hook fact "more than 100" is not supported by the cited source, which tells of the 100th goal at the end of the penultimate game in the season. There is no source for any number higher than 100. The team's article claims 105, but again the (different) source they use is about the penultimate game. It does make clear that Lysvoll was the one who scored goal 100, so perhaps a new hook could be suggested that links his 30 and scoring the record-breaking 100th goal for the team. As it is, the hook was edited a couple of times before it was withdrawn from prep, so a revised hook is needed anyway. I think a source is needed for the final season total, whatever it is, or the "more than 100" claim needs to be removed from the article as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- I should be able to do any needed fixes in the next 24 hours. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:09, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry about my rather grumpy respons, I should have thanked you for discovering the mistakes in the article instead. I believe I have solved the sourcing issues in the article. Regarding the hook, I believe Harrias' copyedit of the hook while in the prep-area was for the better, but I've removed the "more than 100". Mentoz86 (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that Vegard Lysvoll (pictured) scored 30 goals during the season in which his club set a new Norwegian goal-scoring record?
- I appreciate what you said. Thanks, and I'm glad you found that new 105 source—I've just added it to the club's article. I was wondering if you might want to credit Lysvoll with the record-breaking goal in the hook, something like:
- ALT2: ... that Vegard Lysvoll (pictured) scored 30 goals in the same season that his club set a new Norwegian record when he scored their 100th goal?
- It's 128 characters. If you don't like it, we can certainly go with the even-shorter ALT1 (112 characters). Did you deliberately leave out the piped link for "his club", which Harrias had retained? (There is a general move of late to reduce wikilinks in hooks.) I've included it in ALT2; if you want, do add it to ALT1. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
- I like the ALT2 hook. My intention of leaving out the piped link for "his club" was to not create a WP:EASTEREGG, so I wouldn't mind if the hook read "his club, Tromsdalen UIL" but I believe the hook would be better without the easter egg and without mentioning the name of his club. Mentoz86 (talk) 22:16, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Need a new reviewer to check the recent article changes and the ALT hooks. (I've removed the piped link from ALT2, and struck the original hook since it's been improved upon in the ALTs. I also can't review ALT2 since it's my suggestion.) BlueMoonset (talk) 03:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Both ALT1 and ALT2 seem fine and as someone not interested in football, even I can now fully understand what is meant! I prefer ALT1 because I find it clearer; I do think it is interesting about Lysvoll scoring the 100th goal but it just feels to me it makes the ALT2 hook a bit cumbersome. I'll leave the precise choice to others as both are supported (AGF on Norwegian sources and everything else being checked in the initial review). SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)