Template:Did you know nominations/2015 Boston Marathon


 * 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 Allen3 talk 23:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

2015 Boston Marathon

 * ... that twenty runners from the same town will be participating in the 2015 Boston Marathon?

Created by Sportsguy17 (talk). Self nominated at 16:53, 17 February 2015 (UTC).


 * I think it's pretty notable to have twenty people represent a small town in a prominent marathon like Boston's. Can anyone give advice on the wording of my hook? Thanks.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 18:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg New enough and meets core content policies. However, text taken from a previous article (like the course description here) and WP:DYKSG #A5 says that one has to expand fivefold on top of the copied text, so the article has to be 1900 characters (currently at 1776). --Jakob (talk)  13:04, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * - I forgot about that. Give me a day or two to expand it some and then it should be ready to go.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 13:22, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , I expanded some more, so it should be over 1900 characters at this point. Thanks.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 18:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good now. --Jakob (talk)  18:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Unfortunately far more of the article than the course description is unoriginal - most of it has been copied from either the current or previous version of last year's article. It has under 500 characters of original content, well short of the minimum. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:12, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It is similar to the text, but is not copied. Removing it from the prep area was somewhat ill-informed in my opinion. I would like to see this added back. Copied would mean exactly the same, like it was with the course description, but similar is not the same thing as copied.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 03:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * For example, compare "Runners and spectators have expressed concern that their fun and happy atmosphere may be turned into a marital, gloomy atmosphere. However, some traditions, including kisses from Wellesley College, will not be able to be stopped" vs "Runners and spectators have also expressed concern that their fun and happy atmosphere may be turned into a martial, gloomy atmosphere. However, some traditions, including kisses from Wellesley College students, will not be stopped" - the very minor changes do not make this passage substantially original. Even accounting for the subsequent changes to the article by EEng, this article does not have nearly enough original content to warrant promotion at this time. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Although I think removing the hook was a bit ludicrous, I'm willing to fix the article so it can make it back on. How much text needs to be added so that it can work, ?  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 01:26, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * About 4590 characters. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:47, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Isn't this a new article? So doesn't it just need to be 1500 chars, exclusive of "imported" content? How does 5X get into it? EEng (talk) 17:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It is a new article and indeed you're correct, which I one of the reasons I challenged the undoing of Jakec's promotion. The DYK rules do not explicitly state a fivefold expansion and there is plenty of new content, so this should be re-added to a prep area soon.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 20:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, not so fast. Content essentially copied forward really doesn't count. Excluding the course description section you're 250 characters short of 1500, so just find some interesting things to say for 250 characters and as far as I'm concerned you'd be OK. ? EEng (talk) 20:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have some content I can add, but I'm going to wait until I'm back at my computer, and then it should be good to go.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 20:52, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not the case. Did you know states that to be considered a "new article", it cannot be copied from an existing article, as it was in this case. Per supplementary rule A5, "If some of the text were copied from another Wikipedia article, then it must be expanded fivefold as if the copied text had been a separate article". Which means, in this case, that since most of the article was copied another c. 4260 characters is required in order for it to be eligible. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Well with articles like these, you cannot create a Boston Marathon article without the course description and at this point, security too; it's like the infobox of most articles, but for the course. Usually, I'd acquiesce and just add the amount you said, but here it's a little unfair to hold a necessity like that against an editor. What EEng has said is correct and is the most sensible for this scenario.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 21:05, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I'm afraid not. If as you suggest it is not possible to include sufficient original content for this to be eligible at this time, then perhaps it can be run after the marathon occurs (at which time new content will become feasible), or run in ITN instead. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It'll end up as an ITN article for sure after the marathon, so it won't be able to be a DYK after that occurs. Once I add a little more content, it should be fine for DYK as EEng and I have stated. Jakec's closure originally was appropriate. Why are you trying so hard to not have this be in the DYK section?  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 21:25, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Because it doesn't qualify, and "a little more" won't be sufficient to make it qualify. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:53, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I give up at this point. If it's not going to be successful without an unreasonable amount of text needing to be added to it first, then it should be closed as not promoted, especially since it'll end up in the ITN section two months from now anyway.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 22:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh for heaven's sake. The clear intent of the rules is that if you split off a piece of an existing article to a new name, then it's not a "new article" and the 5X requirement obtains. Just because two sentences --
 * The course runs through 26 miles 385 yards (42.195 km) of roads, mostly following Route 135, Route 16, Route 30, and city streets into the center of Boston, where the official finish line is located on Boylston Street in Copley Square alongside the Boston Public Library. The race runs through Hopkinton, Ashland, Framingham, Natick, Wellesley, Newton, Brookline, and Boston.
 * -- were carried forward (appropriately) from the article on the 2014 event, to the article on the 2015 event, doesn't mean some giant expansion is needed around that tiny bit. It's silly. But to end this fussing I've rewritten that passage . There! Now nothing's "copied" and there's no 5X requirement, and the total size is >2000 characters. EEng (talk) 22:32, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * So on a technical basis, the article now works and isn't "copied"? This is very relieving, because adding nearly 4600 characters of text to the article of a marathon that hasn't occurred yet is basically impossible unless you add a load of irrelevant gibberish. Hopefully, we can finally get this DYK off the launch pad. Talk about unnecessary drama...  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 22:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No, on a technical basis the article is still copied, because it wasn't just two sentences - it was most of the article, including the whole Security section. Of course, the "marital" silliness is not applicable to this year and should be removed, but expansion would still be needed. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:19, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, since there is currently no sourcing to support any of that section being applicable to this year, you should just remove it. Then you would only need to add 400 characters. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * There, . I removed the security section and added another section quite relevant to this marathon actually. So hopefully it's all good to go now.  Sports guy17  ( T •  C ) 02:50, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Great, that's certainly an improvement. Size requirements now met. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)