Template:Did you know nominations/Marco Pierre White Jr
- 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: rejected by reviewer, closed by Freedom4U talk 03:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Marco Pierre White Jr
- ... that Marco Pierre White Jr bought the first two iPhone Xs sold in the United Kingdom?
- ALT1: ... that Andrew Tate's series of Big Brother, Big Brother 17, featured the first man to be evicted first in any UK series, Marco Pierre White Jr?
- ALT2: ... that Marco Pierre White boycotted MasterChef Australia for several years due to comments one of the judges made about Marco Pierre White Jr?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kathanar - The Wild Sorcerer
Created by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 08:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Marco Pierre White Jr; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
Article moved to mainspace within the window; long enough, QPQ done. There are, however, a few things that concern me here. Firstly, do we have a source for ALT0? Secondly, for BLP reasons, I think we need to tread carefully about giving front-page focus to articles which prominently detail the criminal histories of relatively non-notable living people. Thirdly, although the article is heavily cited, the tone isn't always encyclopaedic: in particular, a lot of the language is rather sensational and more in keeping with a newspaper (tabloid?) report than what we are going for here. One could also argue a WP:DUEWEIGHT problem with the level of detail given about White's relationship difficulties in the "early life" section, particularly as so many of the words and actions quoted are not his own. @Theleekycauldron and RoySmith:: I wonder if either of you (or any other co-ords, but I'm not immediately sure of who those are) would take a view here? UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:39, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- ALT0 is sourced to The Independent (the first) and The Telegraph (he bought two). I've cut a chunk out of the early life section; it's well sourced, and I did consider footnoting it, but perhaps it's better placed to his father's article (or if she ever acquires notability beyond WP:INHERITED, her's).--Launchballer 20:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
I've got to be honest, I agree with User:RoySmith that the article may not be the best fit for the front page. There's an element of WP:BLPKIND (is it really kind or right to use our considerable platform to highlight the rather sordid past of a fairly minor, not-really-public figure?): there's also some wisdom in the essay Wikipedia:NOTCENSORED and the Main Page, that even though we pointedly don't censor the site, we also should consider whether what we put on the front page is likely to cause more harm than good to the encyclopaedia's reputation. Given the predominance of sexual and graphic material in this article (almost a whole line of the lead seems to consist of a detailed reconstruction of a sexual assault though this isn't the impression given in the body text), and the other BLP and WP:DUEWEIGHT concerns, I don't think this should run as a DYK in its current form. UndercoverClassicist T·C 20:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- ALT0 is sourced to The Independent (the first) and The Telegraph (he bought two). I've cut a chunk out of the early life section; it's well sourced, and I did consider footnoting it, but perhaps it's better placed to his father's article (or if she ever acquires notability beyond WP:INHERITED, her's).--Launchballer 20:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
DYK doesn't have coords per se, but it wouldn't be the first time I've been called a "DYK coord". I agree this article is tricky for the intersections of DYK with negative BLPs. Of all my GAs, there's only one I never took to DYK, because the nature of the subject's notability meant there was no sensitive hook. After it passed GAN, the article was unexpectedly driveby nominated; I declined the nomination. There are some interesting parts of this article, and I see why there was a desire to nominate it. I don't think the ratios work out, though -- the subject is fairly little-known, so combining that with the negative framework of his notability, it's hard to see a clear way forward. Vaticidalprophet 21:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- AirshipJungleman29 has just taken out about 60% of the article. What is your opinion of the current version?--Launchballer 19:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- If somebody had to delete 60% of the article to make it acceptable, I'd say it fails "The article should not be subject to unresolved edit-warring". RoySmith (talk) 01:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- I...think it's worse, DYK-wise. The previous version had a lot of crimes mixed with some content about him as a person, if not a lot. The new version is just the crimes, really. (I'd have removed "made a bad tweet" before "had his ribs tattooed by Buddhist monks".) The stripped-down version just highlights how tricky it is to write an article about someone like this, let alone put it on the main page. Vaticidalprophet 01:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- Agreed with Roy and Vati: ironically, I think it's a less bad article in many respects (particularly tone and due weight), but condensing it to its critical elements really shows that an article which is fundamentally about some quite unremarkable (but very tabloid-friendly) bad behaviour by someone whose claim to be a public figure is pretty tenuous. To be honest, I think there's a case (WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:ONEEVENT and WP:NOTNEWS) that the article should be reduced to sub-articles of others (of Marco Sr. and the relevant Big Brother series, I'd suggest). UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
I generally find myself in the camp of "any article about a serious crime, particularly a recent one, should have to demonstrate enduring historical significance to exist at all". That view is, as far as I can tell, something to the effect of WP:NEVENT on steroids, although I will point out that NEVENT's rule to that effect has been trampled on. I would IAR decline this myself, but I don't think the policy infrastructure otherwise exists to decline an topic so thoroughly covered by national press. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist: Where are we at with this nomination? If you are able to approve it or formally reject it, I suggest indicating so below. If you are still unsure, I suggest opening a new thread at WT:DYK and getting additional opinions. Z1720 (talk) 02:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- My view is that we should not promote this article. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:22, 25 November 2023 (UTC)