Template:Did you know nominations/Cynthia García Coll


 * 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 Yoninah (talk) 21:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Promoted by User:Cwmhiraeth here

Cynthia García Coll
Source: : "Using data from the 2002 Educational Longitudinal Study, a study of more than 16,000 U.S. school students, one of us, Alexandra Filindra, worked with Cynthia Garcia Coll and David Blanding to explore how these state-level welfare policies affected the children of immigrants. In states that granted TANF to low-income immigrants, graduation rates for children who had at least one foreign-born parent were 5.3 percentage points higher than those in states that excluded them." Created by QuakerSquirrel (talk). Nominated by 28bytes (talk) at 22:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC).
 * ... that Cynthia García Coll has shown immigrant children were more likely to graduate if they lived in states that granted TANF benefits to low-income immigrant families?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/My-Linh Thai


 * G M G talk  13:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I started on this and then got super busy. It's Thanksgiving this weekend in the US. But if I can't get it wrapped up this weekend, I will by Monday at the latest.  G M G  talk  22:48, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries! I appreciate the work you've done on it already. Enjoy your Thanksgiving! Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, I've shot an email to the subject to see if she can publicly publish fairly mundane personal details in a way that we can cite on Wikipedia. Probably 80% chance she doesn't respond, but we'll see.  G M G  talk  00:13, 22 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Just jotting down my thoughts before the family gets awake and moving this morning. (Apologies for probably being more anal retentive than your average QPQ.) It looks like the link to the original study in the WaPo piece is broken. But as far as I can tell, this is the only paper these three authors have published together. I don't see where the 5.3 statistic is in the original piece (or a rounded "5.2..."). So that's a little odd.
 * My intuition is that "TANF" is probably overly specific for the hook. It's very Ameri-centric (and an acronym that most Americans themselves probably don't recognize). Besides, the study also seems to include fairly prominent attention to the effect of Medicaid access, and the implicit suggestion seems to be that these findings should be generalizable to other similar programs. I'm fond of the succinct wording of this passage: "The children of immigrants are more likely to succeed educationally when they live in states that include immigrants into their welfare net."
 * So maybe something like "...that research by Cynthia García Coll and colleagues have shown that immigrant children have more educational success when their families have access to the social safety net?"
 * That's riding the line of close paraphrasing a little bit maybe, but hopefully sticks close enough to bare information presentation that wouldn't be a problem. (There's only so many ways you can say that exact information accurately.)  G M G  talk  14:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Your suggestion looks great to me. Unfortunately, I'm very new to all of this & don't know how to go in and change the hook. If you are able to change it, that would be great. Let me know if not. Thanks! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 16:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey, no worries QuakerSquirrel. Thanks for helping us build a better encyclopedia! I'll wrap this up over the next couple of days and just make sure we're ready for the main page.  G M G  talk  17:08, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I'll just go ahead and give it the tick Symbol confirmed.svg for the alt hook since nobody has raised any objections. New enough, long enough, hook supported by news and journal source, copyvio is all titles she's held and titles of works. If there's any last minute polishing to be done on the article I'll knock it out while it's in the queue.  G M G  talk  20:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks GreenMeansGo! I really appreciate all the work you've done improving the article. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 21:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this but I feel like the hooks aren't that hooky. Any other suggestions, and ?  Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 13:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Repinging and, since the pings won't go through without a signature.   G M G  talk  13:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi . I'm open to different wording or a different interesting fact to highlight. What do you suggest? 28bytes (talk) 14:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Can't really suggest a hook but how about adding some comparison with american citizens and like from being backlogged to surpassing them or some sort? Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 15:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Just to be clear, are you referring to both the original hooks and the suggested tweak?  G M G  talk  18:52, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh I'm referring the suggestion to the ALT1 hook. Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 04:24, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Any updates? It has been 3 months here Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 06:31, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Umm... User:Ritchie333, User:Serial Number 54129, any bright ideas on what to do to make this one hooky?  G M G  talk  13:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Sup, . Well, since it's the second most widely-spoken language globally, so of undoubted general interest, and with the addition of poking the current administration in the eye, how bout


 * ALT1 that according to Cynthia García Coll, first-generation immigrant children often surpass American-born children in school? 2A02:C7F:BE3E:4200:F9F3:3AD8:DCAF:4519 (talk) 14:18, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Which source are we taking that from? (It's been several weeks since I read through the sources.)  G M G  talk  14:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey, looking at the article the information around ALT1 is in the third paragraph of the Personal life section, cited to this source. Does that help you out?-- SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:30, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the source is nowhere near that definitive about surpassing; the "often" has to do with the first-generation immigrant kids being behind the Americans at the start, but catch up or even surpass them before elementary school is over. The article currently makes a stronger claim than the source, as does the hook. This is a college newspaper, so there should be an element of caution having to do with the source. Is the report the story is based on available to check? BlueMoonset (talk) 14:43, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this is round about where I probably screwed up. I tried to make my suggested hook above be as accurate as possible, but it's difficult to be exceedingly accurate with social science related hooks and also be catchy and intuitive.  G M G  talk  14:49, 5 February 2019 (UTC)


 * While I'm not sure if readers could find it hooky or not, another suggestion here could be about her writing an op-ed about the hurricanes that hit Puerto Rico. If that won't work out, ALT1 does seem like a good option considering there's attribution and qualifying statements there, but of course, that would be dependent on if other sources agree on it (which right now appears not to be the case). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 16:46, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Striking ALT1 due to the issues I noted above; the sole source it depends on does not support it. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:15, 5 February 2019 (UTC)


 * To be clear, my suggested ALT above was "...that research by Cynthia García Coll and colleagues have shown that immigrant children have more educational success when their families have access to the social safety net?"  G M G  talk  17:24, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * There's absolutely no point whatsoever in pinging people to half-written articles: if it contains material not covered by the source, then it needs to be removed from the article,, not just struck through here. WP:V applies regardless of how desperate DYK is. 2A02:C7F:BE3E:4200:F9F3:3AD8:DCAF:4519 (talk) 19:31, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * 2A02:C7F:BE3E:4200:F9F3:3AD8:DCAF:4519, I certainly had (and have) no intention of allowing this to be approved without the article being fixed, but also don't have the time (as you clearly do not) to research further and find the best and most accurate wording for what the source (and hopefully others) say about Coll's actual conclusions. Please remember WP:AGF. Reposting GreenMeansGo's alt hook below so it's not lost in the middle of a paragraph; perhaps they'll be willing to fix the article so it, at the least, accurately reflects the source in question. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2019 (UTC)


 * ALT: ... that research by Cynthia García Coll and colleagues have shown that immigrant children have more educational success when their families have access to the social safety net?

This ALT hook looks good to me but of course I can't approve it. All of the DYK criteria are met, though; can someone please check this and either promote it or let me know what else needs to be done to get it cleared for takeoff? 28bytes (talk) 15:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * BlueMoonset, Narutolovehinata5: You all have any issues with the alt?  G M G  talk  15:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)


 * 28bytes, GreenMeansGo, I have no issues with the ALT. As noted in my post above from February 5, First-generation immigrant children often surpass American-born children in school despite being behind them when they start school. in the article is a stronger claim than the one in the source (a college newspaper), and needs to be fixed. Please let us know when this has been dealt with. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * It appears likely to be from this source, but I don't have jack for scholarly access.  G M G  talk  17:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm sure QuakerSquirrel can help sort out any inconsistencies. I'll send an email. 28bytes (talk) 00:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * 28bytes, any news? It's coming up on two weeks. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I spoke with QuakerSquirrel, who seems very discouraged about this whole process and seems unlikely to return to edit. If User:GreenMeansGo or perhaps someone from WiR has the time and inclination to try to wrap up the remaining issue(s) I'd certainly be appreciative but I understand if they're otherwise occupied. 28bytes (talk) 05:18, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That bit has now been removed and can be readded when we get someone who has access to the source. I believe that was the only outstanding issue? I'm sad to hear that this has been so thoroughly discouraging when QS did do a genuinely good job on writing this article.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  11:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * GreenMeansGo, the phrase is still there in the edit you link to. I may have put a "failed verification" template on it, but articles can always be improved (including their sourcing and their reading of the sources), and there's a certain level that must be attained for DYK and similar processes. While that template remains, the nomination cannot be promoted. I'm also saddened that QS has been discouraged, but at the same time, verifiability is a prime driver of Wikipedia, and without a fix it can't. 28bytes, you're the nominator—can't you read the cited source yourself and revise that sentence to properly reflect what the source says? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:06, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My bad BlueMoonset. I though you had removed it. I dunno what I was distracted with at the time. I've now moved it to talk pending verification.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  22:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment-I can access the book, Looking now. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 12:16, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * -You claim that the alternate hook is from this source. Now, Cynthia Garcia Coll has not authored a single chapter of the book. She was a co-editor of the book. So, how does any assertion from any chapter of the book, get attributed to her research? &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 12:32, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Umm... no I think that's got it backward. That was the source for the bit about whether immigrant children exceed native born children I believe. The bit specifically about the effects of the social safety net on educational attainment is cited to this study in the Harvard Educational Review. Unless I'm confusing something?  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  12:46, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I messed it up:-( &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 17:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There appears to be 3 proposed hooks:-
 * ... that Cynthia García Coll has shown immigrant children were more likely to graduate if they lived in states that granted TANF benefits to low-income immigrant families?
 * ... that research by Cynthia García Coll and colleagues have shown that immigrant children have more educational success when their families have access to the social safety net?
 * Both of the above hooks are based on a common theme and sourced from this study. But, IMO, there's nothing remotely hooky about this for it's pretty common sense that providing more welfare opportunities will result in welfare. If it was the reverse; it would have been quite stunning (and hooky).
 * ... that according to Cynthia García Coll, first-generation immigrant children often surpass American-born children in school?
 * Based on the sourcing over Brown Herald; the hook is solid and hooky enough.
 * But, at the same time, attributing a research-fact to the co-editor of a book, without giving any credence to the chapter-author, seems to be immoral.
 * I am also wary of sourcing claims from individual scholars in the area; to prevent propagation of fringe data. Are we certain that any other research conducted around the same locus has not led to some contrasting conclusion? &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 17:56, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * My understanding was that we were going with the second of these hooks. This may not be true everywhere, but in conservative circles in the West, it's not at all taken as a given that welfare will be beneficial, and rather popular to think that it will encourage generational cycles of laziness and government dependence. Government assistance to immigrant families is particularly controversial.
 * Am I sure no one has ever reached a contrasting conclusion? No, I'm not an expert in the field, so I can't say anything approaching "being sure". She seems to be among the preeminent scholars in her area, and when I did a modest review of the sources available, none of them that I saw felt the need to include serious objection by adversaries among her peers.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  18:14, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If that's indeed the case (and I'm ignorant by a mile or so about understandings in Western conservative circles), as to the second hook; I guess the it is pretty good:-)
 * As to contradictions (third hook); I did a search of studies around these areas and did not locate any opposition. Her findings have been cited by other respected scholars. So, all's good on that aspect, too. &#x222F; <b style="color:#070">WBG</b> converse 05:44, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * As I have said several times above, the Brown University source, when it was in the article, did not support "often surpass"; the phrase it used was catch up or even surpass them, and we don't know that "often" also applies to "or even surpass". As such, the ALT that Winged Blades of Godric likes is not solid: the sentence about it was removed from the article because it was inadequately supported by the source; that's irrelevant now because the "fact" is not in the article as currently written. I'm very sorry that we seem to be trapped between hooks that are said to be uninteresting because they should be obvious (though I'm not convinced that having assistance from the social safety net would necessarily be a guarantor of better school performance) and ones that do not have sufficient source support, but that seems to be where we are. Striking the re-added "third" hook that has the "often" claim. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:50, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I've been going for the same hook all the while, and I'm not really seeing vehement opposition from anyone contributing. But I give up. After rewriting much of the article, and revisiting for a number of months. I give up.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  21:47, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


 * ALT2: ... that Cynthia García Coll from Puerto Rico has researched the resilience of children born to teen mothers and of immigrant children. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Approving ALT2: Alright, this one has been sitting in our queue for a while and I'd like to review it. Article is short but long enough, there are no copyright violations, hook is cited by source #5, ALT2 hook is interesting, there are no tags, sources are reliable, and article was new when it was first nominated. The rest of the hooks provided here may be problematic since they make bold claims, but ALT2 is safe and interesting. Please check the updates I made on the article in case anyone disagrees with any of the changes. Regards, MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 01:56, 30 March 2019 (UTC)