Jump to content

Talk:Ibrahim Omer

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)
Penny Simonds
Penny Simonds

Created by HenryCrun15 (talk), Kiwichris (talk), YttriumShrew (talk), Idiosyncritic (talk), Pokelova (talk), MurielMary (talk), and MerrilyPutrid (talk). Nominated by DrThneed (talk) at 02:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • Reviewed: only my second DYK so no review required
  • 16 QPS required.
Arena Williams
Arena Williams
Nine new Labour Party MPs
Nine new Labour Party MPs
Overall status
Number Article Review status QPQ status QPQ by
1 Ibrahim Omer Green tickY none needed DrThneed
2 Helen White Green tickY none needed DrThneed
3 Neru Leavasa Green tickY none needed DrThneed
4 Arena Williams Green tickY none needed DrThneed
5 Ingrid Leary Green tickY Year of the Rabbit donated by SL93
6 Gaurav Sharma withdrawn Alexandra Girls’ English Institution donated by Narutolovehinata5
7 Rachel Brooking Green tickY J. Michael Lane DrThneed
8 Anna Lorck Green tickY Misumena vatia DrThneed
9 Tracey McLellan Green tickY Maddalena Mariani Masi DrThneed ‎
10 Shanan Halbert Green tickY Kanutus Johannis DrThneed
11 Joseph Mooney Green tickY Badhshala DrThneed
12 Simon Watts Green tickY Walter Cornelius Schwede66
13 Penny Simmonds Green tickY Leickness Simbayi donated by Yoninah
14 Toni Severin Green tickY Bert Nievera donated by Yoninah
15 Simon Court Green tickY Back in the High Life (1 of 3) donated by Yoninah
16 Brooke van Velden Green tickY Back in the High Life (2 of 3) donated by Yoninah
17 Chris Baillie Green tickY Back in the High Life (3 of 3) donated by Yoninah
18 Ricardo Menéndez March Green tickY 1907 Skowhegan textile strike Schwede66
19 Teanau Tuiono Green tickY Delaware County Institute of Science Giantflightlessbirds
20 Rawiri Waititi Green tickY Newton Collins DrThneed

To get the table to display, I had to take the closing brackets off the last line (where it says: "Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line."). That buggers up the code somewhat. If anybody knows how to make the table display without that workaround, please apply the fix. Schwede66 18:12, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General discussion
  • Comment: This is a multiple DYK and we are posting this request to Talk:Did you know. Please note that all articles were created in project space and moved into mainspace on election night (17 October) or the following morning.

Created by HenryCrun15 (talk), Kiwichris (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), Kiwichris (talk), YttriumShrew (talk), Kiwichris (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), Idiosyncritic (talk), Kiwichris (talk), Kiwichris (talk), Kiwichris (talk), Kiwichris (talk), Pokelova (talk), MurielMary (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), HenryCrun15 (talk), and MerrilyPutrid (talk). Nominated by DrThneed (talk) at 02:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC).[reply]

I've just contacted the photographer to confirm that this is a legitimate Commons upload by her, as this is an official Māori Party photo. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 07:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Tip: We usually put the pictured link first in the hook, not middle or last. Also, we don't use parentheses in the hook. Yoninah (talk) 03:45, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately the Rawiri Waititi photo turned out to be a copyright violation. I've asked the photographer if she'd like to donate one of her own images to Commons. —23:29, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Hope that works. If not, as I said below, we could always use an image of one of the young attractive women, like Arena Williams. Yoninah (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Donating one QPQ - Template:Did you know nominations/Year of the Rabbit (ballet). SL93 (talk) 02:48, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have struck the original hook, since except for (pictured), parentheses should not be used in hooks (see WP:DYKSG#C9). So the hook will need to be recast. I figured it was better to point this out now so a new hook can be submitted without them. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I had drafted an ALT1 as part of this edit but had so many problems with getting everything to display that I hit the preview button several dozen times. Rearranging things and trying to figure out what was causing the table to not display, I must have edited out ALT1 in the process. Anyway, I had edited out the parentheses (which Antony-22 has also just done), picked the Rawiri Waititi photo (as it's the more interesting one) and rearranged the hook so that Waititi appeared first. Ah well.
Good to see that reviewing is going well. Good effort, everyone! Final results are five days away so there is no pressing need to finish this in a hurry as there will be changes to the details (e.g. how many new MPs there are). Schwede66 04:51, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ibrahim Omer
  • : reviewing Ibrahim Omer: QPQ exempt, earwigs suggests no copyvio, was mainspaced on 17 October and nommed on the 23, so is barely within 7 days. 1772 B of prose, so long enough. Article is sourced and something along the lines of ALT0 is cited. GTG. Eddie891 Talk Work 16:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neru Leavasa
  • reviewing Neru Leavasa: New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. However, the article doesn't say or cite the fact that he was elected in 2020. Image is freely licensed. QPQ doneNo QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 23:18, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It was included in the Political career section that he stood in an electorate in 2020 and was successful, but probably wasn't as clear as it could have been, so I've added the info into the lede as well. DrThneed (talk) 23:30, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DrThneed: thank you, but please see my edits to the article. I think you should streamline the way you're writing all these bios. There is no need for an uncontroversial cite in the lead. I moved the cite down to the body of the article where it says he was elected in the 2020 election. Hook ref verified and cited inline. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 23:46, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Yoninah I appreciate the advice. This DYK process is a steep learning curve, so I am trying to keep up with the right way to do everything. The MP articles stem from a group project I was not so involved with though so there are bound to be some variations in how things have been done.DrThneed (talk) 23:53, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Helen White
  • Reviewing Helen White (politician): New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. Image is freely licensed. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits.
  • The hook says she was elected but the article says she got into the legislature as a member of the partylist. Are these the same thing? I tried to edit the lead along those lines.
  • BTW a picture of a cute, younger woman like White would be good for the image slot in case Waititi doesn't work out. Yoninah (talk) 18:07, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you - I agree that elected isn't the right word to use for someone who gets into parliament as a list MP, I think I've caught all the other list MPs and changed the language for them too.DrThneed (talk) 02:54, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If I may chip in... The WP New Zealand politics group has consensus that list MPs are elected from a party list. No second class status; nothing underhand. They got elected; same as electorate MPs. Just saying. Schwede66 09:14, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Arena Williams
  • Reviewing Arena Williams: New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. Hook ref verified and cited inline. This phrase is copied from the source, however: to illustrate how students were forced to "borrow to live". Image is freely licensed and would make a good image for the image slot. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credits. Yoninah (talk) 18:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yoninah Thank you for the review. I have fixed up that phrase. DrThneed (talk) 06:28, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ingrid Leary
Gaurav Sharma
  • This appears to be the republication of an article that existed for over a month in 2017 before it was deleted at AfD for notability issues, with a small amount of new information about his 2020 electoral win. The article was at 1975 prose characters prior to deletion, and virtually all of them are in the new version of the article, which is 2138 prose characters. The question here is, since DYK content is suppose to be new, whether material that had been published nearly three years ago can be counted now, whether a 5x expansion is required or not. Either the 1975 needs to be expanded fivefold, or a new 1500 prose characters would need to be created, of which perhaps 163 to 200 have been. I'm not sure whether either would be feasible, and would like to get opinions from other DYK regulars on what they feel the process should be. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 00:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Right. It was me who did the history merge on 18 October 2020 after I had spotted that this had previously been deleted. Upon checking the last version pre-deletion and the new version created on 17 August 2020‎ in project space, they were the same. The user who created the original article also set up the 2020 draft and they obviously kept a version of what got deleted in December 2017. Nothing wrong with that. But it does confirm that it's not "new content". I therefore suggest that we withdraw this article from the nomination (and DrThneed can keep one QPQ up her sleeve for future purposes). Schwede66 05:04, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Seems sensible Schwede66 but as I've twice managed to stuff up this page just commenting I am not setting foot (finger?) near that table to edit it! DrThneed (talk) 04:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Have nuked Sharma. Schwede66 04:49, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Schwede66, I had a bunch of edit conflicts with you and DrThneed. The icon indicates that this article only didn't make it. I have added back the prior versions of the hook; changes are supposed to be done as ALTs, not direct edits. The hook is a bit long, otherwise I'd suggest leaving Gaurav Sharma (politician) in the hook as a non-bold link. The only question is by how much the hook will be allowed to exceed the 200 maximum per WP:DYKSG#C3: A hook introducing more than one article is an exception to the hook length rule: subtract from the overall count the bolded characters for each additional new article beyond the first. If the result is 200 or less, the hook length is probably acceptable. Otherwise the hook may still be acceptable (on a case-by-case basis) if it is reasonably compact and readable. I think it does a pretty good job of compact and readable when you consider that "including " accounts for 40 of the 237 total characters when you exclude all but the first bold link and eliminate "Gaurav Sharma". BlueMoonset (talk) 05:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the edit conflicts. Noted re ALT hooks. The vast majority of the 40 new MPs have new articles, it's just that many weren't up to DYK standard when the nomination had to be in. Therefore, if any that did get nominated don't make it, they shouldn't really feature as it wouldn't be fair to the other MPs who missed out being nominated. Not sure that there's scope to make the hook any shorter so it would be good to invoke WP:IAR. Schwede66 05:11, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rachel Brooking
Anna Lorck
Tracey McLellan
Shanan Halbert
  • Reviewing Shanan Halbert: New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. There is close paraphrasing which should be rewritten in your own words:
  • Source: Shanan Halbert​, who campaigned on improving public transport, supporting local business and improving access to mental health services,
  • Article: Halbert campaigned on improving public transport, supporting local business and improving access to mental health services.
  • Hook ref verified and cited inline. Image is freely licensed. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 20:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Yoninah: I have attended to the close paraphrasing issue. Please have another look. Schwede66 21:43, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph Mooney
  • Reviewing Joseph Mooney (New Zealand politician): New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. There is quite a bit of close paraphrasing here; I put the first one in quotes, which looks weird, rewrote another one, and here's the third for you to re-phrase:
  • Source: after his omission and subsequent apology over leaking private patient information to several media outlets
  • Article: after his admission and subsequent apology to leaking private patient information to several media outlets
  • Image is freely licensed. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 20:18, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Yoninah: Fixed the sentence in question, let me know if any other issues. DrThneed (talk) 09:01, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Simon Watts
  • @Yoninah: I've reviewed the article (don't worry about the terminology that I used on the nom page) and found that the hook fact did not check out because the article made something up. The nominator subsequently withdrew the DYK nomination. What part of that does not qualify for a QPQ? Schwede66 20:42, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Penny Simmonds

Article was moved to mainspace on October 17 and nominated within seven days. Length is sufficient. Article appears neutral in tone. No plagiarism issues detected. Hook is interesting and pending final approval. Image is properly licensed on the Commons, clear at a low resolution and could enhance the hook. QPQ has been completed. Article has a citation needed tag to be addressed to complete sourcing requirements, and should be clear which position was resigned. Flibirigit (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Flibirigit: I have attended to those two open issues. Please take another look. Schwede66 22:27, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Article now meets sourcing requirements and all other DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 23:35, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Toni Severin

Meets requirements and a QPQ has been provided. No close paraphrasing found and the hook fact is cited inline. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:54, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Court

Article was moved to mainspace on October 17 and nominated within seven days. Length is sufficient as I counted 1595 characters. Article meets sourcing requirements and is neutral in tone. Hook is interesting and pending final approval. No images used in this article. QPQ has been provided. I have minor plagiarism concerns. As noted here, the statement Court said he'd been a supporter of Act for about 22 years but joined the party after going to a party event in December from the source appears almost verbatim in this article, and should be either formatted as a quote or reworded. Also as noted here, several statements from the source appear almost verbatim but none are formatted as a quote. I suggest rewording these or making them into direct quotes. Flibirigit (talk) 20:00, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Flibirigit: I have attended to those issues. Schwede66 00:27, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Paraphrasing issues have been resolved. Article now meets all DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Brooke van Velden

New enough, long enough, adequate sourcing. Neutral. Fixed some close paraphrasing. Removed birthdate, which was sourced to a tweet and a mention of her age. QPQ done, no pic. Good to go. —valereee (talk) 10:55, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Baillie

Article was moved to mainspace on October 17 and nominated within seven days. Length and sourcing are adequate. Article appear neutral in tone. Minor plagiarism concern since the direct quote highlighted here is formatted to appear as only one word being quoted rather than a lengthy quote. Hook is interesting and pending final approval. No images used in this article. QPQ has been provided. Flibirigit (talk) 18:46, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review @Flibirigit:, I have fixed the sentence concerned, let me know if there is anything else.DrThneed (talk) 22:19, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Minor plagiarism concern has been resolved. Article now meets all DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 23:25, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ricardo Menéndez March

Reviewing Ricardo Menéndez March: it appears to meet DYK requirements of length and sourcing. The creation date is confusing: was the article published in mainspace on October 25? According to DYK the page was created in May but had been a draft until October, but assuming that October is the actual moving-to-mainspace then it should be fine. The article is actually pretty interesting by itself and if people here are willing then it could actually work as a solo hook if a hook about his prior career as a film projectionist was proposed. For DYK purposes I will be donating my review of Alexandra Girls’ English Institution. However, I would still highly suggest that DrThneed and Giantflightlessbirds provide at least some of required QPQs (perhaps with the two sharing the load), as per DYK's supplementary guidelines DrThneed only has four freebies left and all four will be used up by this nomination given that more than four articles have been nominated. Given that 36 QPQs are needed and assuming not all of them will be donated, perhaps DrThneed and GFB can do at least three reviews each, with the other mentioned NZ editors also doing the remaining reviews? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Narutolovehinata5 don't worry we will make sure the QPQs are all done. There are 20 bolded articles in the DYK though which means minus my four free ones, there were 16 remaining to do. I have done (or am in the process of completing, if issues are resolved) another four, and thanks to you and other kind people donating (thank you!) we will get there before the 9th November. I hadn't responded to the comments and suggestions above yet as this was the brainchild of Schwede66 and I wanted to let him get back from holiday to discuss how to progress. DrThneed (talk) 21:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I donated 5 QPQs. Yoninah (talk) 09:49, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Narutolovehinata5, qpqs are done. —valereee (talk) 10:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Giving the Ricardo nom a tentative go-ahead, but I was wondering if any of the noms are open to it running as a separate hook instead with the suggestion I gave. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:27, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, this is GTG now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:15, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teanau Tuiono
Rawiri Waititi

Reviewing one article: Rawiri Waititi: New enough, long enough. Neutral POV, copyvio check shows nothing but the quoted stuff. Hook interesting enough, although if we could work in/support the fact there were an unusual number of new members, that might help improve the interest of the hook. Hook fact cited. Photo of Waititi is great and clear at size, and I agree with Gadfium that it's more compelling. License looks okay but it's a brand-new uploader so let's hope there isn't a problem. QPQ hasn't been done, nom has only 1 previous DYK so they have 4 freebies coming, which means this hook needs 16 more QPQ. Please ping me to complete review once the QPQ and photo questions have been resolved. This hook will likely need multiple reviewers. —valereee (talk) 12:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the QPQs have all been done and the image seems to have been removed from the article; too bad, it was great. This one's good to go. —valereee (talk) 10:37, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
General comments

Right then. The final results are out. We have 42 new members; both Labour (Emily Henderson) and the Māori Party (Debbie Ngarewa-Packer) gained one additional new member. I've added a reference for "42 new members" to the article on the 53rd New Zealand Parliament. I can update the hook later (have to dash out now). Schwede66 20:16, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've now had a chance to craft ALT3 with the correct numbers (42 new members; both Labour and Māori gained one additional new MP) and picked Arena Williams as the one to be pictured as discussed / requested above. I've also added prose and sources to the relevant articles. The fact that we now have 42 new members is stated in the article 53rd New Zealand Parliament, which is part of the hook. The magic number "42" is mentioned in this article published by Newshub yesterday. A different article, Results of the 2020 New Zealand general election, lists all changes to the members and has the names and party allegiance of the 42 new members. That article thus provides the breakdown of new members by party (23 for Labour, etc) and it does so in the section MP changes. There are two sources for the new members, and that is an article with bios of the 40 new members that were returned based on preliminary results, plus an article that outlines the changes that came from the final results. I hope that's all clear and easy enough to follow. If there are any qualms or queries, please speak out.
And one last thing. We managed to get our hands onto the complete set of candidate photos for the Labour Party (OTRS all done and dusted; phew). Nine of the new MPs are from Labour. The photos all have the same style, size, and white background. In other words, this could lend itself to a montage showing the new Labour MPs in a 3x3 grid. If there's interest, I can put together a mockup using the multiple image template. If that finds favour, somebody with the right software can no doubt stitch the nine photos together into a single file. Thoughts, please. Schwede66 01:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Schwede66: A montage sounds great, especially because the hook is going to fill up a lot of space (we probably will consider it equal to 2–3 hooks while building the set). But the 43-member hook fact must be included in one of the bolded links, per DYK rules. I think you can just mention it in a by-the-by way in one of the articles: So-and-so was one of the 43 new members elected to the New Zealand Parliament in 2020. The total for each party could be mentioned in one of the articles pertaining to the new Labour/National/ACT/Green/Maori representatives: So-and-so was one of the 23 new members elected to Parliament from the Labour Party in 2020.—though it would be nice to state that in each of the party representative articles. Yoninah (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's correct; that source confirms the 40 new MPs based on the preliminary results. You then need to look at the other source outlined above that gives the changes resulting from the final results: that's when both Labour and Māori won an additional MP each, and they were both new ones (Emily Henderson and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, respectively). I put hidden notes into the refs to explain what the refs confirm. I know this is all very complicated! Schwede66 21:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, that is not what the source says but MMP is a bit difficult. It does say (for example, in the heading) that the composition of Parliament's 120 members has changed by National losing two seats, and Labour and Māori gaining one each. What the body then explains in a bit more detail is that some electorates had different outcomes, with three of them changing from National to Labour. In two of those cases (Priyanca Radhakrishnan in Maungakiekie, and Willow-Jean Prime in Northland), the electorate winners from the Labour Party had already been confirmed as list candidates, so no change in the makeup of Parliament. In a third electorate, Whangārei, it did make a difference as the Labour candidate, Emily Henderson, had a low list ranking (at 64). Hence, Henderson is the 23rd new Labour MP. We've already covered the new Māori Party MP (Debbie Ngarewa-Packer). For completeness, the two National Party MPs that lost their membership when the final results came in were Denise Lee and Matt King; both had previously been elected in 2017 and thus weren't new MPs. I'm afraid that there isn't a source that neatly lists all the 42 new MPs. In fact, I took to Twitter for help to find a source that mentioned "42". Schwede66 21:55, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I feel it should be reverted but others are welcome to comment. All of the twenty nominated articles have had an initial review. @Yoninah: do you want to first chance to be the final reviewer once all twenty are approved? Flibirigit (talk) 21:46, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow! A truly impressive effort by all the reviewers and QPQ contributors to this multi-hook. All the articles have been individually approved and the hook facts about the number of new MPs and the number of MPs per party have been entered into the following articles:
  • Rawiri Waititi: 42 new MPs; 2 (new) Māori Party MPs
  • Arena Williams: 23 new Labour MPs
  • Joseph Mooney: 5 new National MPs
  • Brooke van Velden: 9 new ACT MPs
  • Ricardo Menéndez March: 3 new Green MPs
  • In addition, the nine images in the picture grid are all freely licensed.
  • Here is the approved hook and image for promotion:
Nine new Labour Party MPs
Nine new Labour Party MPs
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ibrahim_Omer&oldid=1257828417"