Template:Did you know nominations/Sesame Workshop

Another nomination after passing GA would be okay

Sesame Workshop
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Aurora Film Corporation
 * ... that the Children's Television Workshop, responsible for Sesame Street, changed its name to Sesame Workshop in 2000?
 * Comment: Not a new article, but most of the content is either entirely new or re-stated.
 * Comment: Not a new article, but most of the content is either entirely new or re-stated.

5x expanded by Figureskatingfan (talk). Self nominated at 17:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC).


 * Symbol delete vote.svg The prior revision is 15 kilobytes. The current revision is 19 kb. I'm afraid that you are unable to expand it to 75kb. If it is promoted as Good Article as soon as possible... well, the nomination will take weeks since there aren't many GA reviewers lately. You can re-nominate it as "Improved to Good Article", but that's about it. --George Ho (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There is precedent here at DYK for a re-written and re-vamped article, which this is, to pass here. (Actually, it happened to me: Template:Did you know nominations/Elmo's World).  Much of the content in the old version has been cut and replaced with new information, and the content that remains has been re-stated and sourced. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, I'm torn. I'll leave this to someone else. George Ho (talk) 01:39, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Christine, I'm sorry, but George is absolutely right: the guidelines are quite clear about requiring a 5x expansion even when material is cut and new inserted (see WP:DYKSG for the reasoning). If the old article had been riddled with copyvios that material would be excluded from the calculations, but it would require over 10kb of that original 15kb article to have been removed for specifically due to plagiarism, which seems highly unlikely. You do have a route to nominate this legally, as George notes, and that is to take the article to GA status and then nominate here within five days of passage, which is something I hope you will consider. As for the Elmo's World nomination, it was passed by Bonkers The Clown, who showed a less than firm grasp of the DYK rules while he contributed to DYK, and has subsequently been blocked indefinitely and violated that block by using sockpuppets, including here at DYK. So, while you lucked out in your reviewer that time, it certainly isn't a precedent to count on—5x is a requirement that should always be in force on regular article expansions, even if completely rewritten and revamped. At least now you'll know for future DYK submissions. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I certainly didn't know about Bonkers. My understanding of the 5x requirement is that if the article was entirely new and entirely replaced by new material, then it didn't apply.  That was certainly true about Elmo's World, and I'd say the same thing about this one, too.  90% of this article is new.  But you guys have more knowledge about the DYK rules than I do, so I'll accept your ruling. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:34, 2 January 2014 (UTC)