Template:Did you know nominations/Afghanistan at the Asian Games Myanmar at the Asian Games India at the Asian Games Pakistan at the Asian Games Philippines at the Asian Games Asian Games Federation

Afghanistan at the Asian Games, Myanmar at the Asian Games, India at the Asian Games, Pakistan at the Asian Games, Philippines at the Asian Games, Asian Games Federation

 * ... that Afghanistan, Burma, India, Pakistan, and Philippines were the first five members of the Asian Games Federation?
 * Reviewed: The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery, Carly Wilson, Henry Kressel, Teuku Nyak Arif, Walter Merchant House, Blackeye goby

Created/expanded by Bill william compton (talk). Self nom at 18:28, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * A drive-by comment: This is a sextuple hook. I'm under the impression that the author/nominator has to do 6 peer reviews. Right? --PFHLai (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Really? is there any specific rule/guideline for this?. I'm not aware of any such thing existing over here. Last time when I nominated four articles together in a same hook, nobody asked me to review three more nominations. undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   20:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * An oversight at most. You should do 6 reviews, otherwise this becomes a burden for reviewers (unfair for an editor to nominate 6 articles while doing only one review when another person has to review all 6 of the articles here) Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it's okay now?. undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   14:10, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg For reviews that's fine. I'm going to be busy this week, so I'll tag this as ready for rereview in case I cannot do any more work with the nomination. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

<--I am not comfortable with this multiple DYK. One, for the Asian Games Federation, is fine--it's long enough and verified enough, though I haven't looked in any detail. But the other five are carbon copies of each other. The articles contain around 1500 characters, not counting the tables (per DYK rules), and the text is the same in all them with the proper names substituted. Drmies (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Not only name but facts also change with the article. May appear carbon copies because all are related to same subject, written by same editor, and due to scarcity of sources I don't have much to add. All the articles are about participation of "Asian" countries in the "Asian" Games, section of "Membership of Olympic Council of Asia" was necessary as term "Asian Games" needs proper explanation (all the MSEs organized by OCA are Asian Games, but the Asian Summer Games is also the Asian Games), so this section is must. And only article about Afghanistan is 1647 characters long, others are: India 1968, Pakistan 3387, Burma 2768, and Philippines 3442 characters. If tables in the Afghanistan article are problem then I can write accompanying prose also. This thread is about a highly undercovered topic on the Wikipedia, which I think deserves a place on the main page.
 * Preceding comment added by Bill william compton with this edit. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comments on length duly noted. You know, I'm very happy that you wrote these articles, and I think that someone else should decide on this--I personally think at least some of them are short, and I am not comfortable with these highly statistical articles whose sourcing is almost completely based on one site, ocasia.org. The Federation article certainly qualifies, of course. Drmies (talk) 02:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll do the review after a request from the author. Before starting, I am fine with the ocasia.org reference for non-controversial information (it is a very reliable source) but will complain if it is used too much. Also, the articles need a good copyedit. I agree with Drmies that parts are too formulaic to be considered "new prose", such as the Membership of Olympic Council of Asia sections.
 * Hook: Short enough, interesting, cited
 * Afghanistan: New enough, long enough, paraphrasing looks fine, referencing is okay
 * Myanmar: New and long enough, referencing relies too heavily on ocasia, paraphrasing looks fine
 * India: New enough, long enough. One sentence needs a reference and FN25 needs to be formatted. Paraphrasing looks fine.
 * Pakistan: New enough, long enough. Fairly well referenced. Paraphrasing looks fine.
 * Philippines: New enough, long enough. Relying rather too heavily on ocasia. Paraphrasing looks fine.
 * Asian Games Federation: New enough, long enough, well referenced. Paraphrasing looks okay
 * Summary: Symbol question.svg Needs a copyedit, and several other details must be dealt with. Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * All checked, except c/e part. Crisco would you be kind enough to give me a demo at a place or two? undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   14:02, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I've copyedited Afghanistan and Myanmar. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Crisco, I truly appreciate your time and effort, thanks for being so helping. undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   05:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I'll give the rest a quick copy edit. Oh, I just noticed this. In the India article it says "Dsouze won a gold in the 200 m freestyle and a bronze in the 200 m freestyle"... so he won two medals in the same event? Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done the copyedit. A couple of articles are still too reliant on ocasia. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:11, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Crisco, Asian Games don't garnish significant media attention like Olympics. Best sources are: ocasia.org, sports.gov.pk, or NOCs websites. Some NOCs like Burma and Afghanistan don't even have websites, so only solution left is to balance in between sports.gov.pk and ocasia.org. "Membership of Olympic Council of Asia" section is about the OCA and its MSEs, so its official website (ocasia.org) is the most reliable source; for sections related to statistical results, I have used a mixture of different sources. undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   12:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Indeed (even here in Indonesia I don't hear much about the games; I think I barely remember hearing about the ones in Bali, but...). However, I agree with Drmies that if possible we should have a better mix of sources. Also, there is that sentence I have a question about above. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah that one, I've already corrected it. It was a bronze in the 100 m freestyle. undefined — Bill william compton  Talk   14:17, 3 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg All issues dealt with to my satisfaction. This is good to go. As I noted above, the text being a bit formulaic in places is probably unavoidable when the same author is writing about several closely related subjects with a shared history. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:35, 3 February 2012 (UTC)