Template:Did you know nominations/Farrakhan v Home Secretary


 * 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) 20:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Farrakhan v Home Secretary

 * ... that Farrakhan v Home Secretary was the first court case to successfully overturn a client's ban on entry to the United Kingdom? Source:  Reference 1: "Louis Farrakhan made legal history yesterday when he won the first high court ruling quashing an exclusion order made by a home secretary".
 * Comment: It would be nice to mention Sadiq Khan being the successful lawyer here, but without the context that you can't get in a hook, it would look like the extremist-by-association smears made by his rivals
 * Comment: It would be nice to mention Sadiq Khan being the successful lawyer here, but without the context that you can't get in a hook, it would look like the extremist-by-association smears made by his rivals

Created by Anarcho-authoritarian (talk). Self-nominated at 14:17, 15 September 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, long enough, no copyvio, the text is neutral as is the hook. My concern here is that the hook is slightly misleading. The way it is written it implies that Farrakhan was eventually allowed to enter the UK, which is not the case: ultimately his ban was not overturned on appeal. I'd feel uncomfortable with this hook on the main page because of this. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Suggest:
 * ALT1: ... that Farrakhan v Home Secretary was the first court case to successfully overturn a client's ban on entry to the United Kingdom—only to be overturned on appeal itself?
 * Is there a reason, by the way, there there is not a period after the "v"? --Usernameunique (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * MOS:LEGAL has periods after v in American cases but not British Anarcho-authoritarian (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 is good to go. QPQ not required for this one and all the other requirements are met. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg You could work Sadiq Khan into the hook this way:
 * ALT2: ... that future Mayor of London Sadiq Khan successfully defended Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan in his appeal of an entry ban to the UK? Yoninah (talk) 20:05, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion. I just think a hook is too short an amount of space to sum up all the nuances of the case. As a lawyer, Khan had to defend his client, even if they were the member of a pro-segregation group. As I referenced in the article, his own opponents manipulated this fact to imply that he represented Farrakhan because he had some sort of ideological alignment with him. BLP is very important on Wikipedia and in cases involving politics like this I have to be as careful as possible. Anarcho-authoritarian (talk) 20:09, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * so are you saying I should promote ALT1? BTW a hook is not meant to summarize all aspects of an article. It's meant to "hook" readers into wanting to read the article. Yoninah (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Please promote ALT1. I am aware that this is not meant to sum up the whole article, but as wrote earlier there is a duty to give a whole picture. As manipulations of the truth about this case have been used very publicly to smear Khan I'm not sure there is a way to mention him here in an appropriate way. Again, I thank you for your suggestions. Anarcho-authoritarian (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes. It would be inappropriate to imply that the final disposition of Farrakhan's case was in his favour. ALT1 is hookey enough and doesn't give the reader a false impression. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg OK. Restoring tick per TonyBallioni's review. Yoninah (talk) 20:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC)