Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Keeping Up with the Joneses (comics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Yoninah (talk) 23:07, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Keeping Up with the Joneses (comics)

[edit]

Created by Cuchullain (talk). Self-nominated at 13:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC).

  • Article is new enough and long enough. Two of the sources look like blogs/self published to me; I assume they satisfy WP:RS despite the appearance? Also, the Stripper's Guide one I am not sure if it's linking to the right page. Otherwise, sourcing wise the ethnicity of Belladonna does not appear in the text nor the meaning of the phrase mentioned in the lead. "Jonses" seems to be a typo. Didn't notice any copyvio or plagiarism. Hook is interesting short enough but an additional citation needs to be put after the sentence in the article where the hook fact is mentioned, apparently. QPQ is done.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:06, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Jo-Jo Eumerus. I think I've fixed all the problems you mentioned. I believe the two sources you mention are reliable as self-published expert sources. Don Markstein (of Toonpedia) was widely published in the field of comics history.[1]. Stripper's Guide is the blog of Allan Holtz and Alex Jay. Holtz is a comics historian who wrote American Newspaper Comics, a standard reference guide published by the University of Michigan Press. I haven't been able to get a copy of that book, but if I do I plan on replacing the blog citations.--Cúchullain t/c 18:21, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Issues resolved, I am going to trust the claim of reliability despite not knowing much of the subject matter - some circumstantial evidence exists.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:34, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

  • I think this hook will not do. This is only one of several theories as to the origin of the phrase "keeping up with the Joneses", as you can see from this book. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:35, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Cwmhiraeth, what does the book say? My understanding is that using the "Jones" name in discussing social rivalries predates the comic (and possibly Wharton's family) but I'd be surprised if the specific phrase "Keeping Up with the Joneses" predates it. We could say "...that Pop Momand's 1913 comic strip Keeping Up with the Joneses popularized the common English idiom "keeping up with the Joneses"" as that's obviously true.
You can see what the book says if you click on the link I gave. It suggests that the saying refers to the activities of two aunts of Edith Wharton back in 1871. Looking at your article and the sources used, some of the other facts in the article are a bit iffy, like the date of the first strip. How about
The link's not working for me. There is some confusion in the sources about the date of the first strip, but 1913 is definitely the accurate year. The Jay and Markstein links cites that strips survive from April 1913 (Jay has an image of one). I'll add another source that discusses both the strip and Wharton.
I don't really like those alt hooks; really the only thing particularly interesting about this strip is the connection to the idiom. Whether or not the strip coined the phrase, it definitely popularized it, so how about:
--Cúchullain t/c 18:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Suits me.--Cúchullain t/c 14:51, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
  • New reviewer needed to check the new ALTs. Jo-Jo Eumerus, would you be willing to take another look at the remaining ALTs and see whether either will do? BlueMoonset (talk) 03:45, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
    ALT1 and ALT2 are too boring IMO. Either ALT3 and ALT4 works, perhaps better ALT3 so that people don't have to click through. Article hasn't changed substantially so other aspects of my prior review still apply, although one new source I can't check.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:04, 14 July 2016 (UTC)