Template:Did you know nominations/Fredrik Pettersson

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 Allen3 ^talk 12:58, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Fredrik Pettersson

(

)

~~... that Fredrik Pettersson (pictured) described himself as being an "energy player" who utilizes his skating ability and hard work to help his team?~~

Reviewed: Not a self-nom, so not needed.
Comment: I know that this is very late. However, I hope DYKAR D9 can be invoked, as enforcing 5 days "only if there is a large backlog of hooks. Otherwise nominated article may still be approved if it were created or expanded after the oldest date listed in Template talk:Did you know#Older nominations." Furthermore, the pic used is a Featured Picture, and it's rare to have FPs for DYK.

5x expanded by Resolute (talk). Nominated by Bloom6132 (talk) at 12:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC).

everything checks out. good length and sources. DYK ready. Good work!--BabbaQ (talk) 13:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I have a great deal of trouble with an article where expansion started on June 29 being nominated 19 days later, rather than the usual 5 days, especially when there are over 190 articles already nominated: that's a very large backlog, especially when we're only promoting 14 hooks a day. (Resolute has had a great many DYKs, so I'd be less inclined to make allowances as I would for a creator new to DYK.) Also, the hook is based on an offline source which is quoting a self-assessment by the subject, hardly a NPOV hook. I would want an assessment of these issues by very experienced DYK reviewers; the Featured Picture is a point in the nomination's favor, but there's no guarantee it would be selected for a lead hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

I can not see the major problem here. OK it is late but not very late either. And the article is fine and the hook ín my opinion is sufficient. I do not think we should be so defensive about an article being nominated late in this particular case especially as the article is DYK ready. Anyway I would agree that a second opinion from a more experienced DYK reviewer is in order.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Second opinion requested as to whether this nomination is eligible for DYK, noting the various facts and interpretations above. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:33, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't think any facts are in dispute. The article was nominated late. But having just worked my way down the page past a large number of older hooks still in progress for one reason or another, a nice article with a featured picture seems acceptable. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The hook, however, remains non-neutral and needs replacing. I'm certainly willing to accept that the article should be eligible, but I thought my assessment of the hook was clear. I've struck it now, just to be on the safe side. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that Fredrik Pettersson (pictured) won a gold medal at the 2013 IIHF World Championship, where he scored 7 points in 9 games?
ALT2 ... that Fredrik Pettersson (pictured) returned to Sweden to start his professional hockey career after the Edmonton Oilers chose not to sign him to an NHL contract? —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer needed to check ALT hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:19, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

ALT 1 is DYK ready. --BabbaQ (talk) 15:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Comment: I think ALT1 is in violation of supplimentary rule C2: One can't tell which kind of sports this is about. ALT2 looks like the better choice.--FoxyOrange (talk) 18:32, 30 July 2013 (UTC)