Did you know nomination

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 asthis nomination's talk page,the article's talk page orWikipedia 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:rejected by reviewer, closed byBorgQueen (talk) 19:43, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that in 2015, cricketing sistersKathryn andSarah Bryce combined in an unbrokenpartnership of 336 for Scotland Under 17s against Lincolnshire Under 17s?Source:Scotland's Bryce sisters spell double-trouble for opposition
  • Reviewed:Template:Did you know nominations/Bob Lee (businessman)
  • Comment: The nominator intends to upgrade theSarah Bryce article in the next few days, so that it, too, can be nominated for DYK. The link to that article in this hook can then be emboldened, such that just the one hook can apply to both articles and DYKs.

5x expanded byBahnfrend (talk). Self-nominated at14:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nomwill be logged atTemplate talk:Did you know nominations/Kathryn Bryce; considerwatching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

• Doing...ミラP@Miraclepine13:33, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free ofcopyright violations,plagiarism, andclose paraphrasing: - Earwig turned upfive results with >10% similarity (84.3, 51.9, 31.0, 13.0, and 12.3), and while most of them are quotes (which may require an explanation of relevance or trimming perWP:COPYQUOTE; there are nine quote boxes, and one of the two-paragraph boxes are particularly long), I found a few close paraphrases (for example, compareWhen Brycefirst moved south to England to attend university at Loughborough in 2017, Warwickshire's Division One county teamcaptain Marie Kelly was also studying there in the article withBrycefirst moved south to England in 2017 to attend university at Loughborough where Warwickshirecaptain Marie Kelly was also studying inthe attached source) which should be resummarized, if possible (seeWP:LIMITED).

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - I'm not really a cricket fan, so I recommend linkingpartnership. Also, "Under 17s" is redundantly said twice, so I recommend mentioning just the Under-17 level, namely:

ALT1: ... that at Under-17 level, cricketing sistersKathryn andSarah Bryce combined in an unbrokenpartnership of 336 for Scotland against Lincolnshire?

Image eligibility:

• Freely licensed: - na
• Used in article: - NA
• Clear at 100px: - NA

QPQ: - None yet
Overall: Expanded starting 11 April, four days before nom. Expanded almost eightfold from375 to2975 words between 8 and 15 April, and currently at3293 (not counting the{{quote}} boxes given the limitations ofWP:PROSESIZE) as of now. I noticed that you wanted to add another article to this nom, which would require you to add a second QPQ. Please ping me if you've added article 2, if you've addressed the issues with article 1, and if you've done both QPQs.ミラP@Miraclepine15:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: Given your subsequent edits, just need these changes and you're good to go for the "plagiarismfree" part:

1. Change "over the last couple of years" to "in the past few years"
2. Change "develop her cricket full-time in a high-performance programme, albeit as an unpaid student, and only during the academic year" to "improve her cricketing skills full-time in a high-performance programme, where she would participate as an unpaid student during the academic year".

I'll still wait for you to finish the promisedSarah Bryce expansion and to do the two QPQs if possible.ミラP@Miraclepine16:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: Thanks for your helpful comments; I had overlooked checking the article with Earwig before nominating it. In Wikipedia bios, I like to include quotes, so that the subject speaks to the reader in her (or his) own voice, and to give the reader the benefit of verbatim comments by others. However, I accept that the original quotes I added to this article needed some trimming, which I have done. I will complete the upgrade of the other article, and the two QPQs, some time in the next week or so.Bahnfrend (talk)09:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: QPQ1 is done, but given your plans for theSarah Bryce expansion, I'll wait until that and QPQ2 are done. Ping me if you do so.ミラP@Miraclepine00:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: I'm now working onSarah Bryce, but the work is proceeding more slowly than I'd expected, partly because the statistics on women's cricket atESPNcricinfo were down for some time. I understand that they are back up again now. I will nominate for DYK within a week of my completing of the upgrade.Bahnfrend (talk)14:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: It's been three weeks, and the Sarah article hasn't been nominated. And considering the article's expansion within the maximum week (8182 ->9022) doesn't meet the 5x criteria and it's not a GA or a recent creation, you won't need to do a second QPQ. In the meantime I'll approve ALT0 and wait for a second reviewer to approve ALT1.ミラP@Miraclepine16:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: The main problem was that most of the statistics were offline for several weeks, including after my last post. They're now back online again, but I've been in hospital in the last week or so and therefore progress has been impaired for another reason. Additionally, the pre-upgrade version of the Sarah Bryce bio was already of substantial length, and I'm not sure I would ever have been able to lengthen it 5 x. Anyway, if you allow me a few more days, I'll complete the upgrade, and then we can go ahead and DYK her sister's bio while also emboldening the link to this one.Bahnfrend (talk)05:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: Based on the prose size from one week ago, (9022 B) you'd have to expandSarah Bryce to 45110 B to make it eligible through the 5x expand process. PerWP:DYKCRIT 1, I'd say a GA nom is the most realistic route.ミラP@Miraclepine23:10, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Still, you have an option to send the Kathryn article to DYK without Sarah.ミラP@Miraclepine23:12, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: I agree. The Sarah article was just too long to begin with. I have now finished expanding it, so you can send the Kathryn article to DYK. I only ask that the link to the Sarah article in the hook be emboldened as well (ie "... that at Under-17 level, cricketing sistersKathryn andSarah Bryce combined in an unbrokenpartnership of 336 for Scotland against Lincolnshire?"), given that both articles have recently been expanded, and that it's inappropriate to treat the sisters differently, even though only one of the articles is eligible for DYK.Bahnfrend (talk)15:18, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: I understand you want both sisters bolded, but based onthis table (can't put it here due to a glitch with{{DYKsubpage}}, theSarah Bryce article unfortunately doesn't meet the 5x expansion criteria and is way older than a week, so if you would like the article bolded, the only optionWP:DYKCRIT#1 permit is to improve and nominate it for GA status. But if you want to run the nomination with just Kathryn bolded, I have no objections. Would you like to nom the article for GA, or are you fine with the hook being run without the article bolded?ミラP@Miraclepine18:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: I've never nominated any article for GA. I'm thinking that maybe I should nominate both articles. Both sisters will probably be playing for Scotland's senior team at a tournament in the Netherlands beginning on 10 July, so perhaps we could aim to publish the DYK on that day. (Scotland will also be playing in another tournament in Spain in September.) What do you think?Bahnfrend (talk)13:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: I agree that 10 July is a fitting day for the hook. And upon some reflection here, and given not just all the work on the almost-tenfold expansion being after the nom was started, but also the fact that it has been slow due in part to the stat sites being offline and to you spending some hospital time, I suppose I can fit in anWP:IAR exemption for the Sarah article, but I would like to see what others think about my idea.ミラP@Miraclepine22:14, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: Sounds like a good idea to me. I will now proceed to upgrade another women's cricket bio, aboutJan Brittin, one of the greatest ever English Test players, so that it can be DYK for 22 June, the first day of the forthcomingWomen's Ashes series.Bahnfrend (talk)13:52, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine:It's now been announced that the two sisters won't be playing in Scotland's first two matches ofthe tournament starting on 10 July. Once the schedule of matches has been published, I'll post an update here as to the day of Scotland's third match, in which presumably they'll both be playing.Bahnfrend (talk)06:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Miraclepine: Okay, the third match is nowscheduled forThursday, 13 June, which is a week from today. Based on the current schedule of updates, it should go intoPrep area 6, which is already nearly full (but can be amended). I've emboldenedSarah Bryce in ALT1 in readiness, so it looks like we're good to go. If 13 July is no longer possible, then the fourth match, in which they should both also be playing, isscheduled forSaturday, 15 June (which will bePrep area 1 in a couple of days' time (ie not quite yet)). Thanks in advance.Bahnfrend (talk)14:46, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bahnfrend: And I'm back. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, butwe've already been decided at the discussion that it would definitely not be fair to grant IAR in this case - besides, the hooks already mention Sarah by name. But at least you won't have do a second QPQ.

And given how much time passed, I think it's time for ALT1 to be approved. ALT0 is already approved, but I cannot approve ALT1 myself (even without Sarah bolded) because I was the one who proposed it. BTW I'm fine with either prep proposal.ミラP@Miraclepine02:36, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose I've made many, many improvements and corrections to this article, but I'm finding some I just can't fix. I've tagged them. And I'm only half way through. I also worry about the content overall... quite a lot of it feels quite fanzine-ish, not content you'd expect to find in an encyclopedia. --Dweller (talk)Old fashioned is the new thing!15:01, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the article is too far from reaching eligibility to attempt meaningful engagement, I do suggest we close.theleekycauldron (talk •contribs) (she/her)06:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Bahnfrend do you plan to address these issues or shall we just close this? --Dweller (talk)Old fashioned is the new thing!16:47, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]