Template:Did you know nominations/Aspergirls


 * 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Aspergirls

 * ... that the book Aspergirls is aimed towards females with Asperger Syndrome?
 * Reviewed: Walking football

5x expanded by SL93 (talk). Self nominated at 05:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Hook seems not interesting, please add an alternate hook, everthing's good, long and new, no copyvio and original research, well sourced, just the hook. -PAPAJECKLOY (hearthrob! kiss me! &#60;3) (talk) 12:27, 10 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Alternate hook: ALT1: ... that most of the women with Asperger syndrome interviewed for Aspergirls were diagnosed after their children received an autism diagnosis? --Amethyst1234 (talk) 16:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Honestly, I think the hook is fine. Sure it would be preferable to have a super interesting hook that everyone is super interested in, but there are some topics that just don't have any exciting facts that you can say about them. I just can't find anything else in the article that would be more "interesting". I think it's fine as-is. Bali88 (talk) 22:42, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I thought that the hook was interesting because there are few resources specifically for girls and women with Asperger Syndrome. SL93 (talk) 23:16, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * there are lots of families dealing with asperbers and autism, I'm sure lots of people will click the link. It has my stamp of approval. Bali88 (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Striking ALT1 hook, as it doesn't hold up: the source says many of the older women interviewed, not most of the interviewed women. I do agree that the original hook is not sufficiently interesting so I'm striking it as well—ALT1 had seemed far more interesting until it turned out to be inaccurate. Recasting it as ALT2:
 * ALT2: ... that many of the older women with Asperger syndrome interviewed for Aspergirls were diagnosed because their children had been?
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg A new review is in order, since unfortunately PapaJeckloy's reviews have been problematic—he is not good at spotting prose issues or close paraphrasing issues in his own prose. For example, the sentence "The thirty-five women interviewed for the book were a range of ages from being in their 20s to their 50s" needed a copyedit, which I have just given, but the whole article should be rechecked during the new review. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 21:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm hoping that the reviews still count towards the DYK requirement because the DYK check doesn't check the block quotes. SL93 (talk) 21:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm withdrawing this. SL93 (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I will see what I can do. SL93 (talk) 21:10, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I edited it. Also, DYK check says "Article has not been created or expanded 5x or promoted to Good Article within the past 10 days", but that is wrong. It was 955 characters before expansion. SL93 (talk) 21:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT2 is not grammatical. Do you mean:
 * ALT3: ... that many of the women interviewed for Aspergirls were diagnosed with Asperger syndrome only after their children showed the same symptoms? Yoninah (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Confirming that this is indeed a 5x expansion. The character count was 956 before expansion and 4795 as of the last edit on August 14. Yoninah (talk) 23:49, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Yoninah, I'm not sure "showed the same symptoms" covers it; how about "had received that diagnosis" (or "had received the same diagnosis")? It wasn't symptoms, but the actual diagnosis; I don't believe the symptoms were necessarily identical. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * OK.
 * ALT4: ... that many of the women interviewed for Aspergirls were diagnosed with Asperger syndrome only after their children had received that diagnosis? Yoninah (talk) 00:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed—the PapaJeckloy review, from shortly before his indefinite block, cannot be relied on. (I think I'm too close to the current hook to do it myself.) Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg the page is now 4789 characters so earlier size should have been under 957 characters, which it was just. So this just scrapes in with expansion.  Size is fine. The article is cited throughout and written in a neutral way. Examining some references and many spot checks reveals no plagiarism, wither close or exact. Correct person is credited. QPQ performed. Hook alt4 is contained in article, cited, short enough, and confirmed with reference.  Good to go with alt4. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:12, 17 September 2014 (UTC)