Template:Did you know nominations/Andrew Schneider (journalist)


 * 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  MPJ  -DK 04:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Schneider (journalist)

 * ... that investigative journalist Andrew Schneider won back-to-back Pulitzer Prizes in 1986 and 1987 for the Pittsburgh Press? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette)
 * Reviewed: Ashkelon dog cemetery

Created by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 04:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg The article is new (created on 19th Feb), sufficiently long, neatly written and no copyvio or neutrality issues detected. The hook reads well, inline referenced with reliable sources. QPQ done. Good for promoting. jojo@nthony (talk) 08:34, 22 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I came to put this in a prep but the wording confuses me, when the article says "for the Pittsburg Press" does that mean that the newspaper itself won the Pulitzer Prize? Sorry I don't know how it works. I would have expected it to be "while working for the Pittsburg Press" but that may just be my ignorance of how the Pulitzer works? If you can clarified I can hopefully get this moved to the prep areas.  MPJ  -DK 03:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * While I'm not all that well-versed in the Pulitzer process, but I believe that some of the awards are to individual journalists and some are to the newspapers and organizations. In this case, the 1986 award was to the two journalists, while the 1987 award was to the newspaper as a whole (but Schneider and his partner were mentioned in the citation).  Sounder Bruce  03:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I see the conundrum - one was directly attributed to him (and his co-worker) the other the paper but he was one of the reporters on the story. Yeah I'm not sure there is a good and short way to write that without the hook becoming clunky. How about my suggestion below? This would clearly indicate that his work was a major part of the awards but also not make it seem like the 87 prize was awarded directly to him? Since this is more of a gramatical tweak of the hook and not a new one I'd be comfortable putting the below text in a prep.  MPJ  -DK 04:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * that investigative journalist Andrew Schneider's work earned back-to-back Pulitzer Prizes in 1986 and 1987?
 * Looks good. I think omitting the paper entirely would be the best way to go about this.  Sounder Bruce  04:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent, I put it in Prep 1 for the main page.  MPJ  -DK 04:15, 5 March 2017 (UTC)