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
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 09:32, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Article is barely new enough and long enough. The company blog is an iffy source but since it's being used to state where the things are produced (a fairly uncontentious claim), it seems we can work with a primary souce. Ditto for that $2 million claim, with intext attribution. I am not sure where the " through which they can sell Bravelets products to raise money for a non-profit organization or to offset a family member's medical expenses." comes from, though. Sourcing otherwise OK assuming that the other sources are reliable, the lead is dependent on text elsewhere so it's fine too. The tone of the article is OK, I think. Nothing on copyviotools and I didn't notice any close paraphrasing either. Both hooks say essentially the same, both seem short enough (personally, I prefer the shorter one) and are sourced with an inline citation. QPQ is done.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions) 15:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the review
Jo-Jo Eumerus. The medical expenses statement is from the Austin source, which says "They’ve even set up a fundraising options to help charities and pay people’s medical bills.".
The Squirrel Conspiracy (
talk) 23:05, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@
The Squirrel Conspiracy: The issue is that it doesn't explicitly say that these fundraising options are part of the custom sites. The two sentences are juxtaposed but that does not guarantee that they refer to the same thing.
WP:SYNTH problems, so to say.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions) 10:57, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
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
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 09:32, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Article is barely new enough and long enough. The company blog is an iffy source but since it's being used to state where the things are produced (a fairly uncontentious claim), it seems we can work with a primary souce. Ditto for that $2 million claim, with intext attribution. I am not sure where the " through which they can sell Bravelets products to raise money for a non-profit organization or to offset a family member's medical expenses." comes from, though. Sourcing otherwise OK assuming that the other sources are reliable, the lead is dependent on text elsewhere so it's fine too. The tone of the article is OK, I think. Nothing on copyviotools and I didn't notice any close paraphrasing either. Both hooks say essentially the same, both seem short enough (personally, I prefer the shorter one) and are sourced with an inline citation. QPQ is done.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions) 15:36, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the review
Jo-Jo Eumerus. The medical expenses statement is from the Austin source, which says "They’ve even set up a fundraising options to help charities and pay people’s medical bills.".
The Squirrel Conspiracy (
talk) 23:05, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
@
The Squirrel Conspiracy: The issue is that it doesn't explicitly say that these fundraising options are part of the custom sites. The two sentences are juxtaposed but that does not guarantee that they refer to the same thing.
WP:SYNTH problems, so to say.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions) 10:57, 15 January 2016 (UTC)