Template:Did you know nominations/Isabela's 4th legislative district special election, 2003

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Isabela's 4th legislative district special election, 2003

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Bishop of Ilagan described the 2003 Isabela's 4th district special election as the most fraudulent in the province's history?

Created/expanded by Howard the Duck (talk). Self nom at 19:28, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Reviewed Bill Walker (Toledo basketball). –H T D 13:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Length (3900 characters), and date of creation (November 8, 2011) both check out, hook is appropriately referenced to ref #7. Spotchecks reveal no evidence of copyvio or close paraphrasing. Good to go. Harrias ^talk 11:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Close paraphrasing concerns. Examples: "Other disturbances included the confrontation of Cordon Mayor Amado Vallejo, Jr. of two lawyers of the Abaya camp who allegedly harassed poll watchers" vs "Mayor Amado C. Vallejo Jr. of Cordon town had earlier confronted two lawyers from the Abaya camp who allegedly tried to harass precinct watchers" and "Abaya's lawyers walked out of the canvassing room, alleging that the the ballot boxes were switched en route to the provincial capital" vs "lawyers of Abaya walked out of the canvassing room, claiming that their candidate was cheated and that there was ballot box switching while these were transported to the Isabela capitol". Nikkimaria (talk) 05:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

There's no way to reword those w/o changing the intent of the sentence. The last example was good enough, while the first one admittedly can be improved. On the first example, let's do this word for word:

Mayor = can't change this.
Amado C. Vallejo Jr. = this is a name. you can't change this,
of Cordon town = this has been changed. "Town" has been ditched.
had earlier confronted two lawyers = Let's see. How can this be changed? If you'd change "confronted" it'll change the meaning of the sentence. Change "earlier" to "a short while ago" and "lawyers" to "attorneys"?
from the Abaya camp = I'm open on how to change this. Change "camp" to "campaign"?
who allegedly tried to harass = Ditto #4. Can you change "harass" without changing the meaning of the sentence?
precinct watchers = This was previously "poll watchers." In Philippine English, "poll watchers" is the more prevalent term, I changed it to a more obscure but can still be easily understood.

As you can seed, only #5 can be changed. The rest either can't be changed or had been reworded. –H T D 09:26, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Rewording is done, hopefully all of the "offending" (if you can classify them as such) "close-paraphrased" passages had been reworded. In some cases, it's simply next to impossible to avoid it from sounding like the original and there's simply no way of rewording it without changing how it means. –H T D 15:49, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the issues have been resolved. I suggest the following minor rewording for the hook:

ALT1 ... that the Bishop of Ilagan described the 4th district special election of 2003 as the most fraudulent in the history of the Philippines' Isabela province? --Orlady (talk) 16:17, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes this is better. –H T D 16:39, 1 December 2011 (UTC)