Template talk:Did you know/Leonidas C. Dyer

Leonidas C. Dyer[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as 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: rejected by Crisco 1492 (talk)

... that Leonidas C. Dyer (pictured) succeeded in getting his anti-lynching bill passed by the US House of Representatives in January 1922 due to "insistent country-wide demand"?

Reviewed: If you reviewed another article before listing this DYK nomination, put it here

Created/expanded by Cmguy777 (talk). Nominated by Parkwells (talk) at 12:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We're still working on this article, but wanted to nominate it before we lost track. It's been long in development.Parkwells (talk) 12:36, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a comment and signature (or just a signature if endorsing) after each aspect you have reviewed:

Hook

Length, format, content rules: Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Source: Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Interest: Not sure about the hook; it's a bit misleading, as the anti-lynching bill only passed one house and didn't become law. How about the ALT below?
Image suitability, if applicable: Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
ALT hooks, if proposed:

ALT1: ... the US Republican congressman Leonidas C. Dyer (pictured) proposed an anti-lynching law that was repeatedly filibustered by white Southern Democrats?

Article

Length: Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Vintage: This is problematic. It is not a new article (created 17 April 2006). At the time it was nominated it had 18 kB (2994 words) of "readable prose". Cmguy777 started expanding it on 16 July, more than two weeks before it was nominated. During the five days before it was nominated the article size was increased by only 2 kB (an extra 257 words). This clearly doesn't meet either the fivefold expansion rule or the new article rule. Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sourcing (V, RS, BLP): Looks OK to me. AGF on the offline sources.
Neutrality: Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Plagiarism/close paraphrasing: No obvious indications. Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
copyvio (images): One image only, PD. Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious faults in prose, structure, formatting: Nothing obvious. Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pretty good article but unfortunately it falls well outside the timeframe and expansion requirements of DYK, so regrettably I'll have to decline this one. Prioryman (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments/discussion: