Template:Did you know nominations/Joy Laking
- 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 Cielquiparle talk 08:16, 25 May 2025 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Joy Laking
- ... that Joy Laking predicted in a school writing assignment that within ten years she would be making a living as an artist? Source: The Sun Times, "Drawn to Success". Source text reads: "OSCVI grad Joy Laking confidently predicted in a Grade 8 writing assignment that within 10 years she would make her living as an artist."
- ALT1: ... that Joy Laking's work was featured on the cover of the 1984 MTT provincial phone book? Source: PNI Atlantic News. Source text reads: "She has won the Woman of Excellence Award and the Queens Diamond Jubilee Medal and has been featured in several books and magazines including the cover of the 1984 MTT provincial phone book."
- Reviewed:
- Comment: This is my first shot at DYK, please let me know if I missed anything. Open to ideas for better hooks. Thanks!
Created by MediaKyle (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
MediaKyle (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2025 (UTC).
- I will do this review, and am starting it now. DaffodilOcean (talk) 00:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
General eligibility:
- New enough:
- This is the one point I am not certain on. The article was nominated for DYK on the same day it was nominated for GA. However, the article was not promoted to GA until May 2, which is more than 7 days after the DYK nomination. Given that this is the first DYK for MediaKyle, I am inclined to allow this. However, this is only the 2nd (3rd ? ) time I have done a DYK review, so I would appreciate some feedback from more experienced DYK reviewers. - Long enough:
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
I am not sure about the timing of the DYK nomination (see above), but otherwise I think this is fine, though I will note that ALT1 is not interesting, particularly as I have never heard of MTT so it lacks broad interest. Otherwise, thanks for the article on Laking and the DYK. I would like to see this on the main page. DaffodilOcean (talk) 01:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- @DaffodilOcean and MediaKyle: Posting as an uninvolved editor: given that the article was nominated on the day of its GA nomination, it should have been rejected as ineligible at the time. However, since it has now been promoted to GA status, it is now eligible. This is a bit of a weird case in that the DYK nomination should have happened no earlier than the date of the GA promotion (that is, May 2) rather than on the day of the GAN starting (April 20). Given the circumstances and this being the nominator's first nomination (and thus this being an honest mistake), I'm inclined to let this slide as a one-time IAR case, with a note to MediaKyle that in the future, all DYK nominations for newly-promoted GAs should be done after the article has been promoted to GA status rather than when it is nominated. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:07, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Oh darn, this is my first time noticing anyone had replied to this. Thanks for the review, and for the feedback. I'm a little confused though, as I thought the article was "new enough" when I nominated it. I had only just moved it from draft the day I nominated it, and primarily developed it in the days prior. Does the day the article is moved from draft not count as the creation date? MediaKyle (talk) 04:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @MediaKyle: If the article was moved to mainspace on April 20 and was nominated the same day, then the article would indeed be eligible for DYK, not as a newly-promoted GA but rather as a new article. Please read WP:DYKNEW for more details, but essentially, an article that was newly moved to mainspace from draftspace or userspace counts as a new article for DYK purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @MediaKyle: and @Narutolovehinata5:} - this is my fault. I did not realize that a new article could immediately be considered for GA, so I missed the check for 'new enough'. My apologies. I will update my review. DaffodilOcean (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks to the feedback from Narutolovehinata5 and comment from MediaKyle, I realize I made a mistake. This article is new enough as the DYK nomination was made the day it was promoted to the mainspace. DaffodilOcean (talk) 10:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
This is all set - thanks for the article, and thanks to Narutolovehinata5 for the extra help in sorting this out. I appreciate the input, and will keep it in: mind for my next DYK review. DaffodilOcean (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @DaffodilOcean:, when doing DYK reviews, please do not overwrite or change your previous comments. Specifically, this edit is not best practice. Instead, please start a whole new line/paragraph and use an updated DYK icon. It makes things much easier for others to follow and review your work. I have fixed the mistakes made, and inserted a corrected icon in the appropriate place. Flibirigit (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Flibirigit: - thanks for the feedback. I struggle with the formatting and options on how to do this part of DYK. My apologies for getting it wrong. DaffodilOcean (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @DaffodilOcean:, when doing DYK reviews, please do not overwrite or change your previous comments. Specifically, this edit is not best practice. Instead, please start a whole new line/paragraph and use an updated DYK icon. It makes things much easier for others to follow and review your work. I have fixed the mistakes made, and inserted a corrected icon in the appropriate place. Flibirigit (talk) 14:08, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks to the feedback from Narutolovehinata5 and comment from MediaKyle, I realize I made a mistake. This article is new enough as the DYK nomination was made the day it was promoted to the mainspace. DaffodilOcean (talk) 10:17, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @MediaKyle: and @Narutolovehinata5:} - this is my fault. I did not realize that a new article could immediately be considered for GA, so I missed the check for 'new enough'. My apologies. I will update my review. DaffodilOcean (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- @MediaKyle: If the article was moved to mainspace on April 20 and was nominated the same day, then the article would indeed be eligible for DYK, not as a newly-promoted GA but rather as a new article. Please read WP:DYKNEW for more details, but essentially, an article that was newly moved to mainspace from draftspace or userspace counts as a new article for DYK purposes. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:22, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Oh darn, this is my first time noticing anyone had replied to this. Thanks for the review, and for the feedback. I'm a little confused though, as I thought the article was "new enough" when I nominated it. I had only just moved it from draft the day I nominated it, and primarily developed it in the days prior. Does the day the article is moved from draft not count as the creation date? MediaKyle (talk) 04:15, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: I'm planning to make a trip to Joy Laking's gallery this week to be able to illustrate this article better. It'd be preferable if we could delay promoting it to the main page until I add the photographs. Thanks, MediaKyle (talk) 22:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
