Template:Did you know nominations/The dog ate my homework
< Template:Did you know nominations
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Revision as of 18:26, 30 October 2012 by imported>Mandarax (mv text that was below the "Please do not write below this line" line)
The dog ate my homework
- ... that the earliest known variant of "The dog ate my homework" (purported proof, pictured) as an excuse dates to 1905?
- Reviewed: British cavalry during the First World War
- Comment: I just had to do that in the mouseover text
Created/expanded by Herostratus (talk), Daniel Case (talk). Nominated by Daniel Case (talk) at 21:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
New: Good. Length: Definitely. Policy: No obvious close paraphrasing. But there is a need for a bit of copy-editing, as some reference coding shows up in the article body. Hook is good. QPQ satisfied. Just polish it up. What a fun article! Abyssal (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Done Found one instance of the superfluous tag and removed it. Hope that was all. Daniel Case (talk) 22:35, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
- I have some factuality concerns. Does this really qualify as an idiom given that it was originally a literal excuse used by school children and not a figurative expression? It seems more like a meme (in the original sense of the word). Abyssal (talk) 11:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- I wasn't the one who originally categorized it. Yes, I'd say you could consider it a meme, and almost a catchphrase, too. Think I should rewrite the lede a bit and add the appropriate cats? Daniel Case (talk) 14:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Template:Outdent Done I tweaked the lede and added Category:Memes. Daniel Case (talk) 13:20, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
- I tweaked the opening sentence, it's probably more accurate to call it an expression than a meme, although that label is probably accurate enough that it can still be categorized as a meme. Do you agree with my changes? Abyssal (talk) 14:31, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- I actually was just thinking that myself. I have no objections; it's better now. Daniel Case (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- There's an issue with the hook. The article doesn't cite a source for the idea that the 1905 issue of Cambrian magazine, just the magazine itself, which would be a WP:OR violation. Abyssal (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- I assume you're missing a word there. I will put a cite to the Slate article in; that was where the "earliest known" comes from. Daniel Case (talk) 16:52, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
Done Do you have any more issues? Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- There's an issue with the hook. The article doesn't cite a source for the idea that the 1905 issue of Cambrian magazine, just the magazine itself, which would be a WP:OR violation. Abyssal (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
- I actually was just thinking that myself. I have no objections; it's better now. Daniel Case (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2012 (UTC)