Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Social media addiction"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Narutolovehinata5 (marking for closure) |
imported>BlueMoonset (closing; insufficient new material in expansion) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | {{ | + | <includeonly>{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk|</includeonly>[[Category:Failed DYK nominations from June 2019]]<div style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> |
− | | | + | :''The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify this page.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|this nomination's talk page]], [[Talk:{{SUBPAGENAME}}|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 [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 05:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)<br /> | |
+ | Insufficient expansion to qualify; much of the added material has been taken from pre-existing articles. | ||
{{DYK conditions}} | {{DYK conditions}} | ||
====Social media addiction==== | ====Social media addiction==== | ||
Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
<div style="float:right; margin-left:0.5em;" id="mp-dyk-img"> | <div style="float:right; margin-left:0.5em;" id="mp-dyk-img"> | ||
{{main page image|image=File:PhonesWhilstWalking.jpg|caption= People walking with smartphones|width=150}} | {{main page image|image=File:PhonesWhilstWalking.jpg|caption= People walking with smartphones|width=150}} | ||
− | </div | + | </div> |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
* ... that females are more likely to develop '''[[social media addiction]]''', but males [[video game addiction]]? <small>Source: "Hawi and colleagues, and numerous cites from this secondary source [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327328659_Identifying_commonalities_and_differences_in_personality_characteristics_of_Internet_and_social_media_addiction_profiles_traits_self-esteem_and_self-construal]</small> | * ... that females are more likely to develop '''[[social media addiction]]''', but males [[video game addiction]]? <small>Source: "Hawi and colleagues, and numerous cites from this secondary source [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327328659_Identifying_commonalities_and_differences_in_personality_characteristics_of_Internet_and_social_media_addiction_profiles_traits_self-esteem_and_self-construal]</small> | ||
:* | :* | ||
<small>5x expanded by [[User:E.3|E.3]] ([[User talk:E.3|talk]]). Self-nominated at 15:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC).</small> | <small>5x expanded by [[User:E.3|E.3]] ([[User talk:E.3|talk]]). Self-nominated at 15:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC).</small> | ||
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Monument to the Fighters of the Revolution|Monument to the Fighters of the Revolution]] | :* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Monument to the Fighters of the Revolution|Monument to the Fighters of the Revolution]] | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
:*{{comment}}The article was expanded from a stub by using content from other pre-existing articles. That content counts towards the original prose, not the expansion. As such, the article hasn't had 5x expansion in any one week period in the last two months. This is <s><b>my first review</b></s> a review that's been withdrawn by the reviewer ( on 18 July), and a second opinion would be welcome. <span style="font-style:italic;font-weight=bold;text-shadow:1px 1px 45px blue">[[User:Usedtobecool|<span style="color:#e52929">Usedtobecool</span>]]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Usedtobecool|✉️]]</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Usedtobecool|✨]] 22:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC) | :*{{comment}}The article was expanded from a stub by using content from other pre-existing articles. That content counts towards the original prose, not the expansion. As such, the article hasn't had 5x expansion in any one week period in the last two months. This is <s><b>my first review</b></s> a review that's been withdrawn by the reviewer ( on 18 July), and a second opinion would be welcome. <span style="font-style:italic;font-weight=bold;text-shadow:1px 1px 45px blue">[[User:Usedtobecool|<span style="color:#e52929">Usedtobecool</span>]]</span> <sup>[[User talk:Usedtobecool|✉️]]</sup> [[Special:Contributions/Usedtobecool|✨]] 22:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC) | ||
Line 31: | Line 25: | ||
*{{ping|E.3}} If you will be unable to respond by Saturday, the nomination will be marked for closure as unsuccessful. [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 23:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC) | *{{ping|E.3}} If you will be unable to respond by Saturday, the nomination will be marked for closure as unsuccessful. [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 23:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC) | ||
:: The lead is difficult and although I state in edit summaries that I took it from other pages, it's actually rewritten for this condition, I'm simply trying to reflect preexisting consensus. However if we must {{tq|quibble}} over what exactly is new content for the DYK (I wrote them all in the other articles before bringing to here) it is definitely impossible for me to add another 18275 prose characters whilst complying with wikipedia policies and consensus, with the proposed condition as controversial as it is :) --'''<span style="font-size:90%;font-family:courier">[[User:E.3|<span style="color:#DB2E16">[E.3]</span>]][[User talk:E.3|<span style="color:#FF9933">[chat2]</span>]][[Special:Contributions/E.3|<span style="color:#FF7133">[me]</span>]]</span>''' | :: The lead is difficult and although I state in edit summaries that I took it from other pages, it's actually rewritten for this condition, I'm simply trying to reflect preexisting consensus. However if we must {{tq|quibble}} over what exactly is new content for the DYK (I wrote them all in the other articles before bringing to here) it is definitely impossible for me to add another 18275 prose characters whilst complying with wikipedia policies and consensus, with the proposed condition as controversial as it is :) --'''<span style="font-size:90%;font-family:courier">[[User:E.3|<span style="color:#DB2E16">[E.3]</span>]][[User talk:E.3|<span style="color:#FF9933">[chat2]</span>]][[Special:Contributions/E.3|<span style="color:#FF7133">[me]</span>]]</span>''' | ||
− | :::[[File:Symbol delete vote.svg|16px]] Noted. Per the nominator's comments, it appears unlikely that the nomination can reach the expansion requirement with a reasonable timeframe. Thus, this nomination is now marked for closure as unsuccessful. [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 23:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC) | + | :::[[File:Symbol delete vote.svg|16px]] Noted. Per the nominator's comments, it appears unlikely that the nomination can reach the expansion requirement with a reasonable timeframe. Thus, this nomination is now marked for closure as unsuccessful. [[User:Narutolovehinata5|Narutolovehinata5]] <sup>[[User talk:Narutolovehinata5|t]][[Special:Contributions/Narutolovehinata5|c]][[WP:CSD|csd]][[Special:Newpages|new]]</sup> 23:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)</div><includeonly>|}}</includeonly><!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
− | }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
Latest revision as of 05:24, 14 August 2019
- 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 05:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Insufficient expansion to qualify; much of the added material has been taken from pre-existing articles.
DYK toolbox |
---|
Social media addiction
- ... that females are more likely to develop social media addiction, but males video game addiction? Source: "Hawi and colleagues, and numerous cites from this secondary source [1]
5x expanded by E.3 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC).
Comment:The article was expanded from a stub by using content from other pre-existing articles. That content counts towards the original prose, not the expansion. As such, the article hasn't had 5x expansion in any one week period in the last two months. This is
my first reviewa review that's been withdrawn by the reviewer ( on 18 July), and a second opinion would be welcome. Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 22:05, 15 July 2019 (UTC)Comment: whilst there is some content from other articles during the expansion the bulk of it was new text. --[E.3][chat2][me] 09:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
- Template:U, a rough count before 28 June shows some 1800 characters, and the current (rough) count is a little over 11,000. How new content comes into a specific article is less important than that it's new to the article, although some may quibble over that, but it's also worth noting that in this edit, the very first addition which had some content from another article, much of the content is references and thus doesn't count toward the prose. So I don't agree that there's a problem here. Drmies (talk) 20:50, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
- I would like to clarify that I wasn't being callous, but only trying to be
extremelythorough as a total newb. I counted prose before expansion at ~1800, prose after addition from other articles at ~4400, and the final prose at ~12,000. Referring to the review guide that said Template:Tq, I had no choice but to come to the conclusion I shared. But, when Template:Noping says it's just a quibble, that's good enough for me. Usedtobecool ✉️ ✨ 13:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
- I would like to clarify that I wasn't being callous, but only trying to be
- BlueMoonset asked me to check on character counts here. The original pre-expansion article, as Drmies notes, was roughly 1800 characters of readable prose. About 3800 were added from other articles - 2500 from the digital media use article, and 600-700 from each of video game addiction and internet addiction disorder articles. (note that not all of the edits were attributed - eg. this one did include copying from another article). This gives a total original prose count of 5586 characters, and DYKcheck gives the current readable prose as 9655 - not quite a 2x expansion. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:38, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Under the circumstances, given Nikkimaria's analysis, the article would need to be expanded to 27930 prose characters without using any additional material from other articles, which seems an awfully high ask. It might be easier to try to get this article to Good Article status, though the wait for reviews is currently many months long. In any event, unless E.3 thinks they can add another 18275 prose characters in the reasonably near future, the nomination can't meet the 5x expansion requirement. Sorry for the bad news. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
- Template:Ping If you will be unable to respond by Saturday, the nomination will be marked for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
- The lead is difficult and although I state in edit summaries that I took it from other pages, it's actually rewritten for this condition, I'm simply trying to reflect preexisting consensus. However if we must Template:Tq over what exactly is new content for the DYK (I wrote them all in the other articles before bringing to here) it is definitely impossible for me to add another 18275 prose characters whilst complying with wikipedia policies and consensus, with the proposed condition as controversial as it is :) --[E.3][chat2][me]
Noted. Per the nominator's comments, it appears unlikely that the nomination can reach the expansion requirement with a reasonable timeframe. Thus, this nomination is now marked for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
- The lead is difficult and although I state in edit summaries that I took it from other pages, it's actually rewritten for this condition, I'm simply trying to reflect preexisting consensus. However if we must Template:Tq over what exactly is new content for the DYK (I wrote them all in the other articles before bringing to here) it is definitely impossible for me to add another 18275 prose characters whilst complying with wikipedia policies and consensus, with the proposed condition as controversial as it is :) --[E.3][chat2][me]