Template:Did you know nominations/Hotel Transylvania (franchise)

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 sst✈ ^(discuss) 10:17, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Hotel Transylvania (franchise)

(

)

... that four Hotel Transylvania video games have been released?

ALT1:... that the first two films in the Hotel Transylvania franchise have grossed over $762 million with just a budget of $165 million?
Reviewed: There's Got to Be a Way

Converted from a redirect by Captain Assassin! (talk). Self-nominated at 02:18, 4 November 2015 (UTC).

Primary hook okay. Copyvio clear, policy clear, no image ... hook is reliably cited, though to a synthesis of sources which, insofar as I'm aware is okay. Hook is compelling. Article passes newness. LavaBaron (talk) 01:45, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm afraid there are grammar issues with both hooks, Captain Assassin! and LavaBaron, though easily-fixed ones. I prefer not to make grammatical changes to hooks without first consulting the nominator and/or reviewer once an article has already passed review, however.

The main hook should read either "... that four Hotel Transylvania video games have been released as of 2012?" (since that's the date of the latest-published source cited in the article), or else simply "... that four Hotel Transylvania video games have been released?"
ALT1 should read "... that the first two films in the Hotel Transylvania franchise have grossed over $732 million with just a budget of $165 million?"

Underlining is just to show where the suggested changes are. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 03:03, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Fascist, you're right. I had to look at it a few times, but "until now" is not correct. Captain Assassin! can you correct? LavaBaron (talk) 03:10, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@LavaBaron: I've corrected both hooks. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 03:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Primary hook GTG. LavaBaron (talk) 03:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello again, Captain Assassin! and LavaBaron, I was just thinking that ALT1 is significantly more interesting than ALT0, but it looks like only ALT0 was reviewed. Is that accurate, LB (do you mind if I call you LB)? Captain, do you have a preference between the two hooks? —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 13:54, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah I also think ALT1 is better. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 17:47, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

@Allen3: Would you please promote this? --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 03:20, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

@Captain Assassin!: A routine check with Earwig's tool bring up "94.5%" violation suspected. The side-by-comparison is a movie review that is almost identical in wording to your article. It appears to be on You Tube. Could this be one of those sites that gets its content from Wikipedia? — Maile (talk) 16:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

@Maile66: Are you kidding me? This is the complete copy of Wikipedia content. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 16:51, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought. Re-ticking this so promoters know there is no problem here. Thanks for your quick reply. — Maile (talk) 16:53, 14 November 2015 (UTC)