Template:Did you know nominations/Lydia Lariba Bawa

Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues

Lydia Lariba Bawa

 * ... that Lydia Lariba Bawa is the Commissioner of Insurance in Ghana?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Benjamin Anderson (adventurer)

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self nominated at 16:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC).


 * I'm so sorry to say this, but I find that this is a terrible article that reads like a resume. The hook is boring as shit. --  Ohc  ¡digame!¿que pasa? 14:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Good to go. Hook is short enough and hook fact is supported by a citation. Article is long enough, new enough, properly tagged as BLP, and QPQ was accomplished. Article is neutral, with many in-line citations, and spot-checks confirm that they support article content. Moderately close paraphrasing appears to exist at times, but appears excusable, since the wording is indeed different at various places throughout, there are only so many ways that simple things can be said, and the information is properly attributed (for example, one source includes the sentence: "She has since 2000 been a visiting lecturer at the West Africa Insurance Institute in Banjul, The Gambia; and a part-time lecturer on various subjects at the Ghana Insurance College (GIC) since its establishment in 2006", while article includes the closely similar sentence "Since the year 2000, she has been a visiting lecturer at the West Africa Insurance Institute in Banjul, The Gambia, and at the Ghana Insurance College since its establishment in 2006"0. Hook is not very interesting overall, but no improvements have come to mind, and perhaps the setting will be interesting to some. -- Presearch (talk) 00:25, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Even though inappropriately expressed by the first review, a DYK requirement is that the hook be interesting. This cannot be ignored by a subsequent reviewer: if an interesting hook cannot be found, then the article should not be featured under DYK, and the nomination should not be approved. (Perhaps this will be a spur to find additional information for the article that could be the basis of an interesting hook.) I'll also be asking Nikkimaria to take a look at the "moderately close paraphrasing" to see whether it is at a level that she considers to be of concern. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Ah, yes, indeed, there it is spelled out - "interesting" is the first requirement for the hook content. Seems to me the page creator should be notified, they'd be the most qualified and motivated to come up with additional material. I've put a notification on their talk page. -- Presearch (talk) 22:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I've taken another look, and I'm concerned about the sourcing. References 1, 4, and 5 are the exact same text (including typos), 2 goes to the main topix.com page, and when searching for Bawa, the first of three selections, with the same title as that in the topix URL, goes to mobile.ghanaweb.com, and is the same article as in FN1, FN4, and FN5. So all four of the multi-use inline sources are the same actual text. Of the other three sources, all are used inline in addition to this master source: FN6 is the SIC insurance company she spent 30 years with, FN7 is a dubious-looking source (zoominfo), and FN3 looks like it was based on a similar press release that the primary multisource text was based on. This is a woman who has been appointed Commissioner of Insurance in Ghana after 30 years in the industry. What makes her notable? What are the duties of the Commissioner of Insurance? (Is there only one? Are there several?) This does indeed read like a resume: is there anything else about her? Is there something remarkable about the post? (It isn't mentioned on Ghana's Wikipedia page.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)


 * How embarrassing - egg on my face - I should have noticed the reference cloning (if that term is appropriate). By doing a Google News archive search it appears there was some earlier news coverage of this person, although I haven't looked close enough to have a sense of any of it could help make the hook rise to the level of interesting. For example, duplicated at, , . Not a lot of coverage, and notability does seem somewhat precarious, since some of this coverage only tangentially deals with the article subject. At this point, it's up to the article creator to solve all these problems, if possible, and make the article interesting. --Presearch (talk) 23:25, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Quick note: not seeing any big red flags as far as close paraphrasing, but I agree the sourcing is suboptimal. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:40, 29 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg No response from the nominator despite two talk-page requests. Given the issues with sourcing and resume-like rather than encyclopedia-like text, I think it's time to close this. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:11, 12 August 2013 (UTC)