Talk:Bernard Descôteaux

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 23:25, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 16:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bernard Descôteaux; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • While the hook is interesting, it is more about Nicolet rather than Descôteaux, so it may not exactly be the best option here. My suggestions are either to propose a hook specifically about Descôteaux, or perhaps try to get Nicolet to GA status so that this can run as a double hook. In addition, I'm not actually sure what the rest of the hook has to do with Descôteaux in the first place. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:27, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure how I missed this. I would like to go with this hook as-is if possible. Also, I just realized that I was missing a QPQ. Adding that now. Ktin (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ktin: Quoting WP:DYKINT: The boldlinked article should generally be the main or at least a major factor in the hook; avoid hooks that are primarily about an incident the subject is only tangentially related to. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Unfortunately, I am unable to think of any better hook here. Suggestions? Ktin (talk) 07:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ktin: Unfortunately, while his career seemed impressive, nothing stands out for a possible hook to me. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:31, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5:. Thanks. If nothing else, then I would want to go with the original hook as it definitely meets the interestingness criterion. What you have linked to is a guidance and not a definitive disqualifying criteria. This is evidenced by the phrasing generally be. If our intent is to surface interesting facts and lead readers to our newest articles, I think this does meet that objective. Would appreciate a review of the article and the hook as-is written. Ktin (talk) 08:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is new enough and long enough. The hooks is cited inline, and it is verified. A QPQ has been provided. Again, the hook is interesting, but it fails WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE given that it is not actually about Descôteaux. I checked the article for any possible hook information, but other than the awards (which I am skeptical make for a good hook even though they are impressive accomplishments) I'm afraid nothing stands out as being hooky. As such, it doesn't seem like this nomination can move forward unfortunately.
As for the hook information itself, it's mentioned as a footnote in the article and overall seems tangential to Descôteaux at best. It could probably be deleted from Descôteaux's article as it doesn't really have relevance to him. My suggestion would be, if possible, to bring Nicolet, Quebec to GA status or give it a 5x expansion to bring it DYK standards, then use the originally proposed hook for Nicolet instead. I should also note that the footnote was copied without attribution from the town's article, but that's not really the main concern here, but rather the appropriateness of the mention in Descôteaux's article itself. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • As noted above in my last comment, I do not agree with the use of a guidance as a disqualifying criteria. Ktin (talk) 09:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it won't disqualify the nomination, but it's a valid reason for coming up with another hook. Gatoclass (talk) 06:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested alt:

If it was a major newspaper, it might work, but given the newspaper is small and niche, it doesn't really seem eyecatchy or hooky. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gatoclass: you read my mind! I was thinking of this same hook last evening. I am good with this hook. Thanks again. Ktin (talk) 19:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I do not agree with @Narutolovehinata5:’s characterization that it is small and niche. It is one of the top 3-4 Francophone newspapers in Quebec. Established in 1910, the paper has quite some respect. Ktin (talk) 19:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The non-Quebecois reader might not get that context, so that's gonna be an issue. It's in the guidelines that we are writing for a broad audience, not a local one. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Respectfully, I disagree. I am going to ask for a different reviewer. Ktin (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's also worth noting, I think, that almost every source in the article mentions his editorship of Le Devoir in the headline, thus confirming it as his most noteworthy contribution.
New reviewer needed for ALT1. Gatoclass (talk) 11:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 needs an end-of-sentence citation, and ref 1 could do with a bit of cleanup so it actually looks like a reference.--Launchballer 12:15, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Launchballer, I have added a cite to the end of the said sentence, I think Ktin will have to fix ref 1. Gatoclass (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks folks. I do not know French, and I am not able to make much of ref1 other than thinking that is refering to page 36 of a book Les cahiers du journalisme from Centre de recherche, École supérieure de journalisme de Lille, Département d'information et de communication, Université Laval with the text in double quotes being the actual phrasing. Irrespective, I have added an English language source from the body if needed. One option is to just remove the ref from the lede. The body is quoted anyway. Ktin (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hurray! Found the source, folks. Have updated it with the French language source as well. Passing this back to you Launchballer. Ktin (talk) 18:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good enough for me. Let's roll.--Launchballer 20:29, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bernard_Descôteaux&oldid=1211124057"