Template:Did you know nominations/Malacañang of the North


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:23, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Malacañang of the North

 * ... that Cecile Licad played a Frédéric Chopin program at the Malacañang of the North (pictured) in 2001? Source: here)

Created by Howard the Duck (talk). Self-nominated at 15:35, 24 March 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Article is new (created on March 24, 2017), long enough (1876 characters), neutral, and complete with citations. Hook format and content is OK. QPQ needed --carlojoseph14 (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Rey de Reyes (2017). – H T  D  19:32, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * carlojoseph14, I don't see that you've addressed close paraphrasing/copyvio checks in your review. Looking over the article, there are a few places that seem a bit too close to the sources; you should make a check in this area to complete your review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:15, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello . Thanks for the reminder. Earwig's results in violation unlikely. carlojoseph14 (talk) 05:32, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * carlojoseph14, you cannot trust the flat percentage or the "violation unlikely" statement; instead, you need to look at the actual phrases that are identical and the text around them. I've found copyvio and close paraphrasing down to a 9% level, and as I noted above, in my opinion there were a few places that seemed too close to the first two sources listed (I didn't check any further). BlueMoonset (talk) 13:10, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * , I've looked at the "close paraphrasing" and confirmed that the actual phrases are actually proper names such as "Philippine Tourism Authority", "Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority", "University of Santo Tomas Center for Conservation of Cultural Property and Environment in the Tropics" and the series Study, Agriculture, Diplomacy, OFW (overseas Filipino workers), Culture, Nation Building and Family. I literally could not do anything on renaming these bodies and rooms, but I can perhaps randomize the names of the rooms if that suits you. – H T  D  09:52, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that there are some spots where the paraphrasing is too close. For example, compare "ruling that Marcos had no legal rights over the property since it is "inalienable public domain," it being a national park" and "ruled that Marcos had no legal rights over the property since it is "inalienable public domain,” it being a national park". Nikkimaria (talk) 14:54, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I usually stick to the sources when it comes to the law as I don't want to deviate from what was intended. If there's anything else that I can edit that's not related to the law, I'll take a look.~ – H T  D 
 * Symbol possible vote.svg Howard the Duck, if you're unwilling to reword material copied from a news report, which is what this is, then I'm afraid the nomination cannot proceed. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I can't rephrase terms such as "legal rights", "inalienable public domain" and "national park". I can probably change "ruled" to "decided", and "property" to something else, though. – H T  D  09:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to finish this review. The close paraphrasing has been addressed, but the original review never addressed the image, which needs to be checked, and the article retains a stub tag, which will need to be settled before this can be promoted. It would be a good idea to have an interesting hook (I don't think a concert qualifies); I've proposed a couple below. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ALT1: ... that the Malacañang of the North (pictured) was built as a Presidential mansion for Ferdinand Marcos's 60th birthday?
 * ALT2: ... that the Malacañang of the North (pictured) was built as a Presidential mansion for Ferdinand Marcos's 60th birthday, and taken back from the Marcos family in 2014?


 * Symbol question.svg, there is something I don't understand: how many times was the house decorated? It seems like it was twice--both times in the same way. PS, , both your hooks are verified. In case you didn't know. Drmies (talk) 04:13, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , sorry for the late response. I'll edit the article to resolve the confusion. – H T  D  01:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Seconding, past reviews on newness, length, neutrality and citations. QPQ done. Image is properly licensed. The stub template was incorrect, so I removed that. I am assuming the recent concerns by User:BlueMoonset was resolved. Approving ALT1 and ALT2 hooks. Good to go.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:47, 18 May 2017 (UTC)