Template:Did you know nominations/Occult America

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 Bruxton (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Occult America

(

)

... that Occult America suggests Abraham Lincoln may have turned to Spiritualism after his son died at the age of eleven? Source: Horowitz, Mitch (15 September 2009). "Mystic Americans". Occult America: The Secret History of How Mysticism Shaped Our Nation. New York, New York: Bantam Books. pp. 57–62. ISBN 978-0-553-80675-5.
- ALT1: ... that Occult America suggests Abraham Lincoln may have turned to Spiritualism after the death of his son? Source: as prior
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Misuzu Yamada
- Comment: Synopses usually aren't cited, but have put this inline for DYK purposes. Not sure whether adding William Wallace Lincoln's age makes it stronger or weaker; have provided both.

Moved to mainspace by Vaticidalprophet (talk). Self-nominated at 06:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Occult America; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

Adequate sourcing: - question.
Neutral:
Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Vaticidalprophet: Good article. Though I have to wonder what makes "Boing Boing" a reliable source. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:29, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

The discussions about them on RSN are all too sparse for clear conclusions, but the latest statements are reliable for topics that typically center around Internet culture and have some reputation, and do seem to have basic editorial controls and fact-checking but not RS-enough for controversial claims. Given they're not being used to support a controversial claim here, they fall reasonably within acceptable grounds. Vaticidalprophet 21:38, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
- Onegreatjoke, just pinging you back to this. Vaticidalprophet 13:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Guess I'll approve. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)