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 The C of E (talk) 06:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Created by 3family6 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:03, 11 June 2021 (UTC).
The article is new enough and long enough. Nothing concerning on Earwig's copyvio detector. The hook is interesting and cited in the article; the source (Allmusic) seems adequate for what it's supporting. QPQ is done. However, the article is currently tagged for overreliance on primary sources - this will need to be resolved before the nomination can continue. I have additional concerns about whether some of the sources used are reliable enough for a BLP, e.g. what makes hardrockhaven.net and soniccathedral.com reliable sources? Citing a statement about her political beliefs to an archive of a now defunct blog seems problematic from a BLP standpoint as well. Needs attention to sourcing before it is promoted to DYK. Spicy (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
The tag was placed by Kingoflettuce. We discussed this on their talk page and I'm not sure if this was resolved or not. Point taken about the defunct blog for statements from 11 years ago - I'll remove that (which should also help with the SPS concerns). Re: Soniccathedral.com and hardrockhaven.net. Hardrockhaven.net has an editorial staff, and some of its stories have been linked to by reliable publications such as Blabbermouth.net and Brave Words & Bloody Knuckles ([1], [2], [3]). Soniccathedral.com has an editorial staff but unfortunately doesn't have an accessible list. It's stories, however, are also sometimes republished/linked to by the aforementioned publications ([4], [5], [6] - this story then subsequently picked up by Ultimate Guitar[7]).--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 01:07, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the edits. I'm still unsure about the use of primary sources - quite a lot of the article seems to be based on Q&A interviews like this [8] which don't have any real secondary analysis, and some sources, like this still seem questionable to me. I do realize it's sort of a niche topic and we can't expect a cover story in the New York Times... if it's alright I'd like to relist this for a second opinion by someone more familiar with sourcing expectations in this area. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 04:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
The Metal Divas source I'm only using for Leah's statements about herself, per WP:BLPSELFPUB and WP:ABOUTSELF. Same with other interviews. These aren't being used to establish notability, but to provide additional verifiable information about her in addition to the third-party content that establishes notability.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:45, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Having worked on similar articles in the past and used similar kinds of sources, I'm willing to assume good faith about the reliability of the interviews and such as long as other kinds of independent coverage exist. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Overall: After re-reviewing this nom, I'm gonna approve. It looks like the contentious blog sources have been removed, and the primary sources are fine since they're only supporting personal information. The singer's childhood and ancestry isn't likely to be super contentious (unless a shocking expose that she doesn't really have British ancestry). After these changes, the article still meets length and sourcing requirements (no copyvio came up in earwig either). The source provided for the hook is reliable, and qpq has been done. BuySomeApples (talk) 00:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
The article is new enough and long enough. Nothing concerning on Earwig's copyvio detector. The hook is interesting and cited in the article; the source (Allmusic) seems adequate for what it's supporting. QPQ is done. However, the article is currently tagged for overreliance on primary sources - this will need to be resolved before the nomination can continue. I have additional concerns about whether some of the sources used are reliable enough for a BLP, e.g. what makes hardrockhaven.net and soniccathedral.com reliable sources? Citing a statement about her political beliefs to an archive of a now defunct blog seems problematic from a BLP standpoint as well. Needs attention to sourcing before it is promoted to DYK. Spicy (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the edits. I'm still unsure about the use of primary sources - quite a lot of the article seems to be based on Q&A interviews like this [8] which don't have any real secondary analysis, and some sources, like this still seem questionable to me. I do realize it's sort of a niche topic and we can't expect a cover story in the New York Times... if it's alright I'd like to relist this for a second opinion by someone more familiar with sourcing expectations in this area. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 04:43, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
After re-reviewing this nom, I'm gonna approve. It looks like the contentious blog sources have been removed, and the primary sources are fine since they're only supporting personal information. The singer's childhood and ancestry isn't likely to be super contentious (unless a shocking expose that she doesn't really have British ancestry). After these changes, the article still meets length and sourcing requirements (no copyvio came up in earwig either). The source provided for the hook is reliable, and qpq has been done. BuySomeApples (talk) 00:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)