Template:Did you know nominations/Jonathan Quinn Barnett


 * 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 EEng (talk) 10:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Jonathan Quinn Barnett

 * ... that super yacht builder Jonathan Quinn Barnett also modeled Klingon ships for Star Trek IV and renovated the Rubicon Estate Winery mansion for Francis Ford Coppola?
 * ALT1: ... that Jonathan Quinn Barnett designed the interior of the 414-foot super yacht Octopus through Seattle ties to the Paul Allen–founded Vulcan Inc.?

Created by Frieda Beamy (talk). Self nominated at 23:54, 9 June 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg I like the first hook much better than ALT1, but the part about renovating Rubicon for Coppola appears to be entirely self-sourced. Is it possible to find neutral third-party sources for this part of the hook? (Note: I did not complete a full review for this nomination, so that still needs to be done.) —David Eppstein (talk) 21:07, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Per DYK Reviewing guide In addition to at least 1,500 characters of readable prose, the article must not be a stub. This requires a judgement call, since there is no mechanical stub definition (see the Croughton-London rule). If an article is, in fact, a stub, you should temporarily reject the nomination; if the article is not a stub, ensure that it is correctly marked as a non-stub, by removing any stub template(s) in the article, and changing any talk-page assessments to start-class or higher. — Maile (talk) 21:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * In this case, that's easily fixed, by removing the stub assessment on the talk page. The article itself is much longer than a stub. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:02, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Consider it un-stubbed, with my compliments. Oh, and it may help to know that the article had been stubbed in the first place by User:Bonkers The Clown who has since been indefinitely blocked. Over to you now, David Eppstein. --Storye book (talk) 17:52, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Article is new enough and long enough. My concerns with sourcing have been resolved as has the technical issue of the stub tag. This appears to be the nominator's first DYK, so no QPQ is needed. Good to go. As above, I prefer the original hook to ALT1. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg I pulled this one from prep as I couldn't see any reference to "Klingon ships for Star Trek IV" in the supplied source. Gatoclass (talk) 13:27, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Here's the quote from p. 37 of SuperYacht World: "While constructing models of Klingon ships for Star Trek IV, Barnett found himself wanting to build something real, not papier-mâché." I don't have the original link, so I supplied the self-mirrored courtesy link. Thank you for your review! Frieda Beamy (talk) 17:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * @ Frieda Beamy. Thank you for your explanation. Unfortunately the unhelpful online link is still there in citation #3, with no Klingons in it. If you cannot supply an online link that will support the hook, you will need to use a separate offline citation, ideally including the quote that you have just given us. Then we can accept it AGF. --Storye book (talk) 18:34, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem. The link support really is there. I go to the bottom of the JQB About page linked by citation #3, where I see a big picture of him, and I scroll down with the bar next to the picture. This shows me the next page, page 37, and using the + magnifier shows the quote in the middle of the page. The home site superyachtworld.com has it but it's behind a paywall. HTH. Frieda Beamy (talk) 19:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Then in that case, please could you kindly write those instructions in full into the citation? If you don't do that, this nomination is liable to be pulled from the DYK queue after it is promoted. Admin will (most of the time) accept an offline AGF hook, but are unlikely to accept a nomination with an online citation in which they cannot find evidence for the hook. --Storye book (talk) 20:06, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * This is ridiculous. The citation is there and has been there all along, as the nominator has now clearly demonstrated. DYK authors are not and should not be responsible for teaching DYK reviewers how to read information that is clearly in the text of the sources. And there is no requirement for removing otherwise-valid sources simply because a courtesy link for the source (that exists elsewhere) is difficult to use. This is a first-time DYK author; let's not be so WP:BITEy. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:44, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I improved the citation anyway, so please feel free to use your judgment. Frieda Beamy (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * @ David Eppstein. This isn't about biting. This is about getting the job done. A lot of the hooks are currently being removed from prep; often because the editor doing the removing is unable to verify a hook from an online source or because that editor does not understand something. The hook for this nom has already been pulled for precisely that reason. You will find that reviewers who are aware of this are responding by taking extra pains to ensure that all hooks with online sources are clearly and easily verifiable, in the hope of avoiding wasted time and the dismay of the nominator. So please don't bite the reviewer. We have already seen some nominators and reviewers stepping away from DYK due to the number of hooks being pulled. Note: I have struck ALT1 because the consensus appears to be in favour of the original hook, but there is nothing wrong with ALT1, so it can be unstruck if required. --Storye book (talk) 07:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you for your kind help and patience, Frieda Beamy. Your edit to the citation has clarified the source verification, and we can now go ahead. Good to go --Storye book (talk) 07:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

To prep4, changing super yacht builder --> super-yacht builder EEng (talk) 10:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)