Template:Did you know nominations/United States Senate election in Illinois, 1885


 * 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

United States Senate election in Illinois, 1885

 * ... that although he was the leading Democratic candidate for most of the 1885 U.S. Senate election in Illinois, William Ralls Morrison only received one vote on the final ballot?
 * ALT1:... that the 1885 U.S. Senate election in Illinois was only settled after the death of a Democratic state representative?
 * Reviewed: Double-hulled tanker

Created by Teemu08 (talk). Self nominated at 17:30, 23 September 2014 (UTC).
 * Symbol question.svg Either hook can be traced via 1885 U.S. Senate election in Illinois instead of William Ralls Morrison. The former article is new enough, long enough, and fully cited. No duplication was found. So far as this link is concerned, the either hook is good to go.
 * The article on William Ralls Morrison is problematic. Citations are sadly lacking throughout the article; three sections are entirely uncited. Length and newness present no problem; the article is easily long enough, and only one day old. However, checking random phrases for duplication reveals that some phrases from this article seem to have rapidly spread upon the internet since the article was created. Examples can be seen at or  or . However, no plagiarism, copying, or paraphrasing was detected. As the given citations for this article do not contain URLs, belief in good faith by the editor must serve in lieu of an actual check of sources. Additionally, if this article is supposed to represent excellence in a new article per DYK intent, it needs an expanded lead.
 * I realize the above paragraph may seem overly stringent and critical. These comments are not offered with any tinge of meanness, but in hopes that they may help improvement of this article. If you feel I may be of assistance in this improvement, please feel free to ask myself or another editor for help. In the meantime, I know not whether its problems preclude its use as DYK; in this regard, the rules seem ambiguous to me.Georgejdorner (talk) 21:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Would you mind citing which DYK rule you think this hook violates? I am having trouble identifying any restrictions on articles that are linked in hooks but are not the DYK article. Teemu08 (talk) 22:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Let me posit the following: If the page views of all links in the hook are counted, then are all those linked articles in the hook required to meet DYK standards? If so, your entry is problematic because of the Morrison link. If not, and if only the quality of the election link needs to pass DYK standards, then you are good to go. As you are much more experienced at DYK than I, I thought I would refer it back to you for a good faith decision. Alternatively, you may ask for a different reviewer, with no objections from me.Georgejdorner (talk) 01:32, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Georgejdorner, Teemu08, DYK reviews are supposed to concern themselves with the article being nominated and the hook's sourcing/support therein—the bold one (or ones) in the hook. Other links are not part of the review, though if a linked article is particularly egregious, I suppose it would be reasonable to request that the link be removed. However, as William Ralls Morrison has not been nominated here, its flaws or features are not relevant to this nomination, and should not be a consideration as to whether this nomination is approved or held back for more work. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:29, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Then it seems my doubts are resolved. Although when I was looking at Morrison, I was thinking that with a few cites and a hook back to the ambush, Teemu could have had a double-header. Also, I understand that the URLs aren't required; however, they would have made information more accessible to the reader. Many thanks, Teemu, for your patience with a newbie at this DYK biz, and you are good to go.Georgejdorner (talk) 14:17, 14 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Note to Georgejdorner: the icon should always be placed first in the comment where you approve the hook, not by the hook itself, which means the icon is at or near the bottom of the template on the left. (I've just moved it for you.) It's the final icon on the template that promoters are looking for (as does the bot listing the number of approvals per day), so placing that icon anywhere else confuses everyone. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2014 (UTC)