Template:Did you know nominations/Get Up and Dance (video game)
- 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 BorgQueen (talk) 08:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Get Up and Dance (video game)
- ... that Ubisoft filed for an unsuccessful temporary restraining order against the release of Get Up and Dance? Source: "A Californian court has blocked Ubisoft’s request for a temporary restraining order on Get Up and Dance." [1]
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mira Bellwether
- Comment: DYK check now says that the article is a 5x expansion, but in case of any tightening, it's currently comparing it to a broken 2012 version where an unsourced tracklist syntax was broken for an edit. It should be compared to the prose contained here. ([2])
5x expanded by Nomader (talk). Self-nominated at 05:34, 30 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Get Up and Dance (video game); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Hello, Nomader! I found the topic and the whole Just Dance affair really interesting. Just me being nit-picky– I would indicate in the hook that Ubisoft is the publisher of Just Dance (for the sake of appealing to those familiar with the game but not the company and also so people can connect the dots as to why the restraining order was filed), but its totally up to you. Article is well-sourced but the only note I have would be to provide citation(s) for the first sentence of the Reception section since its quite specific, and some points aren't elaborated on in the rest of the paragraph. Otherwise its good to go :) —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Cybertrip: Thanks for the review! Added those citations that you mentioned (and cut the holiday bit that was only in one review). I kind of like the simplicity of the original hook which sounds kind of bonkers and will hopefully incite clicks, but I've suggested an ALT below if you'd like to review that too! Nomader (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that the publisher of the Just Dance video game series filed for a temporary restraining order to stop the release of Get Up and Dance in the United States? "A Californian court has blocked Ubisoft’s request for a temporary restraining order on Get Up and Dance. OG International’s dance title was allowed to go on sale as usual in the US." [3]; "A federal court has blocked a restraining order claim from Ubisoft, in which the company was looking to stop the sale of dance title Get Up and Dance." [4]
- Just FYI, I moved the page to Get Up and Dance. It was not conflicting with any article with that exact name, though there is one with a similar name, it uses an ampersand. I would also comment about the hook that "restraining order against" sounds dramatic, but is potentially misleading wording. Maybe "restraining order against the release of" rather than the game itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: If you prefer the simplicity and bonkers-ness of the orig hook then I'm all for it! But I do agree with Zxcvbnm that "restraining order against the release of" is much better... Could we perhaps change it to that? —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:29, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Zxcvbnm: and @Cybertrip: Thanks for the move, I'm fine with that (and thanks for including the disambig piece at the top of the page too!). I added the "restraining order against the release of" to the top one, I think it's a fair point from both of you. Nomader (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: Excuse the fact that I'm absolutely clueless about anything law-related, but actually now on second glance, I notice that the grammar of "unsuccessfully filed" could suggest that Ubisoft was unable to successfully file the restraining order? Could I propose that "unsuccessfully filed for a temporary restraining order" be changed to "filed an unsuccessful temporary restraining order against..."? —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:39, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Cybertrip: Absolutely! Makes sense to me -- it made it sound like they tripped on their way to the judge's chambers in the previous way ha. Changed the hook here. Nomader (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: Hahaha yes exactly! However now I think "filed for" makes it sound like they originally intended for the restraining order to be unsuccessful... Asking now purely out of aforementioned cluelessness whether it is grammatically correct to simply "file an unsuccessful lawsuit"? —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Cybertrip: Absolutely! Makes sense to me -- it made it sound like they tripped on their way to the judge's chambers in the previous way ha. Changed the hook here. Nomader (talk) 17:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: Excuse the fact that I'm absolutely clueless about anything law-related, but actually now on second glance, I notice that the grammar of "unsuccessfully filed" could suggest that Ubisoft was unable to successfully file the restraining order? Could I propose that "unsuccessfully filed for a temporary restraining order" be changed to "filed an unsuccessful temporary restraining order against..."? —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:39, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Zxcvbnm: and @Cybertrip: Thanks for the move, I'm fine with that (and thanks for including the disambig piece at the top of the page too!). I added the "restraining order against the release of" to the top one, I think it's a fair point from both of you. Nomader (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: If you prefer the simplicity and bonkers-ness of the orig hook then I'm all for it! But I do agree with Zxcvbnm that "restraining order against the release of" is much better... Could we perhaps change it to that? —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:29, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- Just FYI, I moved the page to Get Up and Dance. It was not conflicting with any article with that exact name, though there is one with a similar name, it uses an ampersand. I would also comment about the hook that "restraining order against" sounds dramatic, but is potentially misleading wording. Maybe "restraining order against the release of" rather than the game itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that the publisher of the Just Dance video game series filed for a temporary restraining order to stop the release of Get Up and Dance in the United States? "A Californian court has blocked Ubisoft’s request for a temporary restraining order on Get Up and Dance. OG International’s dance title was allowed to go on sale as usual in the US." [3]; "A federal court has blocked a restraining order claim from Ubisoft, in which the company was looking to stop the sale of dance title Get Up and Dance." [4]
- @Cybertrip: Making a new ALT instead of changing the original again. How about this? Should be under the character limit. Can also replace "the publisher of the Just Dance series" with Ubisoft if character concerns are an issue. Feels like I keep rolling around the hole here a bit, so if either you or @Zxcvbnm: have good suggestions here, I'm definitely all ears. Nomader (talk) 20:43, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- ALT2: ... that a filing for a temporary restraining order to stop the release of Get Up and Dance in the United States by the publisher of the Just Dance series was denied?
- @Nomader: I think I'm actually just going to greenlight the original hook because anyone with common sense would understand that people don't actually intend to have unsuccessful restraining orders. Sorry for all the fuss hahaha.
Approved. —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 09:37, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Nomader: I think I'm actually just going to greenlight the original hook because anyone with common sense would understand that people don't actually intend to have unsuccessful restraining orders. Sorry for all the fuss hahaha.
- ALT2: ... that a filing for a temporary restraining order to stop the release of Get Up and Dance in the United States by the publisher of the Just Dance series was denied?
