Template:Did you know nominations/Georgi Romanov
- 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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 22:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Georgi Romanov
- ... that Georgi Romanov had a shootout loss in the 2022–23 KHL season even though he was credited with playing zero minutes that season?
- Reviewed:
Created by Blaylockjam10 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.
Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC).
- @Blaylockjam10: I studied the source and cannot find the hook. Can you lead me to it? Bruxton (talk) 02:56, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Bruxton: It’s under “Regular Season (Complete Stats)”. It looks like it may only be visible on a computer. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 11:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like I need a premium membership to view. I will leave this to another reviewer. Bruxton (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- If "S TEAM LEAGUE GP GD GAA SV% GA SV SO W-L-T TOI" and "2022-23 Avtomobilist Yekaterinburg KHL 1 4 - - - - 0 0-0-1 0:00" means what I think it means, then a) you don't need a premium membership to view and b) I think the hook checks out with the source, depending on what "W-L-T" means, although I haven't yet looked at the article. I'm a bit worried about the phrases "submit stats/facts" and "edit profile" I found on the source - what makes it reliable?--Launchballer 11:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer I saw the same, which made me feel like it was a contributor site. Honestly I was just lost on that page. I think W is win L is loss and T is tie. It is a clever hook which drew me to the nomination, but then I found myself lost for a half hour clicking on pull down menus until I got to a paywall. @BeanieFan11: may be able to help. Bruxton (talk) 14:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing the TOI part of the Elite Prospects link but based on how he played in the game that would make sense. NHL says that he was the goaltender for only the shootout portion in his only game, which would mean that he "officially" had zero minutes since the shootout isn't timed. (Also, I've come across Elite Prospects a number of times – they seem pretty reliable (don't think I've seen an incorrect stat, although I've only used them in writing ~10 hockey articles) and seem to have a staff – also cited ~20,000 times). I'd say it's good for approving as long as the article itself is fine. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:08, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Launchballer I saw the same, which made me feel like it was a contributor site. Honestly I was just lost on that page. I think W is win L is loss and T is tie. It is a clever hook which drew me to the nomination, but then I found myself lost for a half hour clicking on pull down menus until I got to a paywall. @BeanieFan11: may be able to help. Bruxton (talk) 14:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- If "S TEAM LEAGUE GP GD GAA SV% GA SV SO W-L-T TOI" and "2022-23 Avtomobilist Yekaterinburg KHL 1 4 - - - - 0 0-0-1 0:00" means what I think it means, then a) you don't need a premium membership to view and b) I think the hook checks out with the source, depending on what "W-L-T" means, although I haven't yet looked at the article. I'm a bit worried about the phrases "submit stats/facts" and "edit profile" I found on the source - what makes it reliable?--Launchballer 11:57, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like I need a premium membership to view. I will leave this to another reviewer. Bruxton (talk) 04:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Bruxton: It’s under “Regular Season (Complete Stats)”. It looks like it may only be visible on a computer. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 11:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Blaylockjam10 I located the minutes played after being guided. Earwig determined that there is some minor WP:CLOP which needs to be addressed. Also probably not a DYK issue, but consider that we probably do not need a section for three words - it should be combined somewhere. Also the lead should introduce/summarize more of the article; right now it is a single sentence. The hook is interesting and the article is neutral with the correct inline citations. Created on April 19 nominated April 26 so the article is new enough and with 2344 the article is long enough. Bruxton (talk) 18:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Blaylockjam10: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Bruxton and Z1720: What do you think of the article’s quality now? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay. Earwig is at 16.7% - clop was addressed. Personal life was expanded a bit more and the lead is now two sentences. Two sentences are close to a source, but I think we have addressed enough for a pass. Might make a good 
This might make a good quirky hook.(?) Bruxton (talk) 18:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Blaylockjam10 and Bruxton: As written this article would deserve {{prose}} and {{subsections}}, and single-sentence WP:PARAGRAPHs should be avoided - could this be remedied?--Launchballer 14:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Its not written in list format? I also don't see the need of having a bunch of subsections in this brief article and how one would appropriately do it? BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- It reads like one, see WP:PROSELINE.--Launchballer 15:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer and BeanieFan11: I agree that the article could be improved by combining sentences and I usually push for MOS changes, but many are not required by WP:DYKCRIT. Regarding sections, we sometimes feature single paragraph articles at DYK. I will go through it and also ping AirshipJungleman29 to see if they have an opinion. Bruxton (talk) 20:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Articles should be free from dispute tags. If an article deserves one, it can't run per WP:DYKTAG.--Launchballer 20:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- None of {{prose}}, {{subsections}} or {{too many sections}} are listed at Wikipedia:Template index/Disputes; I think Bruxton's alterations are sufficient. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Articles should be free from dispute tags. If an article deserves one, it can't run per WP:DYKTAG.--Launchballer 20:19, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer and BeanieFan11: I agree that the article could be improved by combining sentences and I usually push for MOS changes, but many are not required by WP:DYKCRIT. Regarding sections, we sometimes feature single paragraph articles at DYK. I will go through it and also ping AirshipJungleman29 to see if they have an opinion. Bruxton (talk) 20:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- It reads like one, see WP:PROSELINE.--Launchballer 15:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Its not written in list format? I also don't see the need of having a bunch of subsections in this brief article and how one would appropriately do it? BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Blaylockjam10 and Bruxton: As written this article would deserve {{prose}} and {{subsections}}, and single-sentence WP:PARAGRAPHs should be avoided - could this be remedied?--Launchballer 14:28, 1 June 2024 (UTC)