Template:Did you know nominations/Canada (novel)
- The following discussion 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 Yazan (talk) 05:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Canada (novel)
[edit]- ... that Richard Ford's critically acclaimed novel Canada took him twenty years to write?
Created/expanded by Tokyogirl79 (talk). Self nom at 06:30, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
The article was 185 B (32 words) of readable prose before Tokyogirl79 began expanding it on 2012-11-05. Now it's 1746 B (293 words), a 9.5-time expansion, making it just long enough for qualification. Lots of references—I hope they get used to make the article a bit more substantial.
- Is "critically acclaimed" necessary? Doesn't it violate WP:NPOV? How about just "that Richard Ford's novel Canada took twenty years to write?" Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- Yes and no. The term "critically acclaimed" can be removed if you really want, but considering that I went through about 10+ reviews for the book (not all of which are in the article, obviously) and all of them were positive with little negative criticism, I think that defines the term "critically acclaimed". All the term means, when you boil it down, is that the book was well received by critics. It's not really a non-NPOV thing as much as it's just a summing up of the critic reviews.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well, if nobody else objects, I won't either, but I do think it's unnecessary. Curly Turkey (gobble)
- Then just remove it. I don't particularly care if it's there or not in the end, but I do sort of dislike that stating "critically acclaimed" is automatically considered to be non-neutral. It's a description just as much as anything else.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:40, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well, if nobody else objects, I won't either, but I do think it's unnecessary. Curly Turkey (gobble)
Article approved per Curly Turkey; leaving it to promoter to decide whether hook's "critically acclaimed" should be retained or removed. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
