Template:Did you know nominations/Municipalities of Yucatan

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 ~ Rob^Talk 11:56, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Hocabá Municipality, Huhí Municipality, Sanahcat Municipality, Sotuta Municipality, Dzemul Municipality, Dzilam de Bravo Municipality, Dzilam González Municipality, Mocochá Municipality, Muxupip Municipality, Sinanché Municipality

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

... that Hocabá, Huhí, Sanahcat, Sotuta, Dzemul, Dzilam de Bravo, Dzilam González, Mocochá, Muxupip, Sinanché, Dzidzantún, Suma, Telchac Puerto, Temax, Teya, Yaxkukul and Yobaín are all municipalities of the Mexican state of Yucatán?

Created by SusunW (talk) and Nvvchar (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 05:50, 4 July 2015 (UTC). QPQ pending...

Not reviewing, just making a drive-by comment. The hook doesn't strike me as at all interesting. It's basically just saying "there are a dozen-odd municipalities in Yucatan". Why wouldn't there be some municipalities in Yucatan? There's nothing remarkable about that. Personally, I think your best bet is to split this up into 17 separate nominations (or fewer, if you can't find interesting facts about each municipality). Also, I can say from experience that massive multi-noms tend to attract very few views. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 21:39, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jakec: I couldn't give a monkeys about page views. And let's face it most hooks are unappealing or downright bland. Susun deserves credit for the entries, that's the point.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:18, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

True, not all hooks are spectacular, but (most) people do at least try to spice things up a bit. This is just listing a bunch of administrative divisions. Honestly, if the only reason you're doing this is to give Susan credit for her work (and the work done was valuable; I'm not disputing that), then maybe a barnstar would be more appropriate than a DYK nomination. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 13:32, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The point, aside from crediting her is to show the public the sort of articles being worked on on wikipedia. That's the point of DYK. Whether or not people will really read the hooks or read them all that's the whole point of it IMO. That somebody has spent the time in writing 20 odd decent starter articles on municipalities in Yucatan is exciting for us as a project and attacking systematic bias and should be advertised. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

No @Jakec: you miss the point. I know about the municipalities. The whole point of DYK is to share knowledge with others. A barnstar doesn't do diddly for the community, it gives me a nice fuzzy feeling. But, in light of the fact that you want something more interesting (to you) I have shortened the articles and propose the following:

ALT1 ... that Hocabá, Huhí, Sanahcat, Sotuta, Dzemul, Dzilam González, Mocochá, Muxupip, Sinanché, Dzidzantún, Suma, Telchac Puerto, Temax and Yaxkukul are municipalities which replaced encomiendas of Yucatán?

@Dr. Blofeld: with this wording (exactly 200 chars), 14 reviews are needed and we have done 17 so QPQ is no longer pending and 3 can go to deserving articles on women if you will allow me to do that? SusunW (talk) 14:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

The 17 are fine, in fact I'd propose adding all of the other ones created too, but don't want to make too much work for reviewers. Whatever the reviewers are happy with.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:38, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld: yes, well the 70+ ones I have done would be way too many for reviewers and adding any more would exceed the hook limit of 200 chars. But, I appreciate very much your recognition that they filled a gap in the encyclopedia and are worth reading about. SusunW (talk) 14:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

ALT1 would be slightly better if it were mentioned in all the articles. By the way, the 200 character limit doesn't apply to multi-nominations. But a bare list of articles seems like a misuse of DYK space. Dr. Blofeld himself admits that he doesn't care if anyone reads them, so what is the point of nominating them for DYK? Wikipedia--including the DYK section--is here for the readers, not the editors. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 16:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Jakec: had you looked at the articles you would know that they all talk about encomiendas. I am not remotely sure where your statements about editors v. readers come from since my comments were about sharing knowledge with communities of people. Your comments and opinions neither seem to be about the articles nor their improvement. If you have something constructive to add or wish to actually review the pieces, please do. SusunW (talk) 16:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) SusunW, please note that for multiple-article hooks, only the first (or longest) of the bolded links counts toward the 200 character maximum; you actually have far more room than you think. (Commas and spaces between them do count, however.) If you have more articles of municipalities that replaced encomiendas, then there's no reason not to add them beyond the amount of time it will likely take to get all the articles in the nomination reviewed. Also, if there are other things of interest about some of them, you could split them into two or more hooks. Any QPQs you do not use here can certainly be used elsewhere; you might want to strike them here to avoid confusion in those other nominations. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2015 (UTC) @BlueMoonset: Thank you.SusunW (talk) 16:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Hocabá Municipality - nominated 3 days after created, length of over 2300 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Huhí Municipality - nominated 3 days after created, length of over 1900 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Sanahcat Municipality - nominated 3 days after created, length of over 1900 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Sotuta Municipality - nominated 2 days after created, length of over 2300 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Dzemul Municipality - nominated 2 days after created, length of over 2100 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Dzilam González Municipality - nominated 1 day after created, length of over 2200 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Mocochá Municipality - nominated 1 day after created, length of over 2200 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Muxupip Municipality - nominated 1 day after created, length of over 2000 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Sinanché Municipality - nominated 1 day after created, length of over 2300 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Dzidzantún Municipality - nominated 1 day after created, length of over 2400 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Suma Municipality - nominated on day created, length of over 1600 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Telchac Puerto Municipality - nominated on day created, length of over 2200 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Temax Municipality - nominated on day created, length of over 2600 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
Yaxkukul Municipality - nominated on day created, length of over 1800 characters is adequate, reference citations check, hook source verified, no copyvio or plagiarism, picture copyright free.
QPQs have been done. Good To Go as a multiple article hook.

ALT1 Good To Go. Let me know if you want to add any others to these 14 and I will be glad to review. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you @Doug Coldwell: I am hoping that people will click through the table on the bottom. Maní is really interesting as are some of the others. Yucatán is an amazing place and while the articles may not be read by those who are looking for popular culture items, I do think there will be interest in learning about our world. :) SusunW (talk) 19:47, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

It so happens that I went to Chichen Itza when we went to Club Med in Cancun.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@SusunW: Did you want to add back in Yobaín Municipality, Teya Municipality, and Dzilam de Bravo Municipality? At first glance they look alright. Just get me some QPQs.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:04, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: I think it's good. Teya and Yobaín if I remember are just shy of 1500 chars and Dzilam de Bravo and Dzilam González are nearly mirrors as they were created from each other. Chichen Itza is amazing, but I think my favorite so far is Uxmal or Mayapan (there is still original paint at Mayapan that is awesome!), though I am totally hankering to do Ek' Balam this fall. SusunW (talk) 21:13, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@SusunW: The articles are nicely written. I'll bet you worked them out first in a sandbox draft and may have received some tips from Dr. Blofeld.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: Thank you! First ones in the sandbox for sure, but now I just do them on the fly. The list of people who have helped me is too numerous to remember, but Montanabw was first and she suggested that Pigsonthewing could help me with the templates, then @Rosiestep and Gerda Arendt: spent hours and hours answering questions and then @Dr. Blofeld, Charles01, and ChicXulub: have all reviewed them and improved them. I am sure I missed people, but I've got a lot of helpers. SusunW (talk) 21:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm currently reviewing this for promotion and waiting on an answer to a question regarding the eligibility of these articles. Please do not promote this in the next 24 hours to give me a chance to complete that review, as I think I may have spotted an issue regarding duplicated text. ~ Rob^Talk 22:59, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Adding icon to hold this pending further information regarding the issue mentioned by Rob. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:18, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for holding off for a bit. The issue that I noticed and wanted to follow-up on was text that is substantially duplicated between these articles. In the case of duplicated text, it may only be counted as "new" once, meaning that you need 1500 characters of genuinely new prose in each article. These articles do not qualify for length based on that. If you wish to further expand and ask for another review, you're welcome to do so.

The below numbers are "at most". Where it was clear it was under the 1,500 character limit, I stopped looking for duplicated text. If a new reviewer (or the editor) would like to know what strings of text were duplicated, let me know, and I'll create a user page with them.

Hocabá Municipality - 1270 characters
Huhí Municipality - 877 characters
Sanahcat Municipality - 902 characters
Sotuta Municipality - 1174 characters
Dzemul Municipality - 1337 characters - Now greater than 1500 chars Victuallers (talk) 14:34, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Dzilam González Municipality - 1218 characters
Mocochá Municipality - 1136 characters
Muxupip Municipality - 1007 characters
Sinanché Municipality - 1250 characters
Dzidzantún Municipality - 1092 characters
Suma Municipality - 1295 characters
Telchac Puerto Municipality - 1217 characters
Temax Municipality - 1272 chracters - Now greater than 1500 chars Victuallers (talk) 14:34, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Yaxkukul Municipality - 1225 characters ~ Rob^Talk 11:26, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Why do we bother eh SusunW? I came back to nominating again after a long absence and have to deal with this sort of petty thing. You're missing the point. Never mind.♦ Dr. Blofeld
- @Dr. Blofeld and SusunW: I'd be open to ignoring all rules and running one of the larger ones, given that the combined added text among all articles is clearly sufficient, but I cannot justify running all of them. Would you be interested in suggesting a hook with just one? That fulfills your goals both of crediting SusunW for her work and making people aware of this sort of article, as they could navigate to others through wikilinks. Possibly Temax Municipality? I'll leave which one up to you, although I highly recommend at least 2000 characters of prose. ~ Rob^Talk 12:20, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I wrote a whole response which totally disappeared because of an Edit conflict. I am getting to the end of my rope not just with DYK but Wikipedia in general. BU Rob13 Your analysis is misguided as there is no single source document from which the information on each county is transcluded to all of the documents. There are individual web pages for each county from whence the information is translated. Of course there is duplicate text, it is the same country and same state with the same legal code. If 14 people had written the articles, you would not be making this argument. You are making it because I am the sole author. @Dr. Blofeld: Totally concur. This nomination nudged me to come back to DYK after a long absence, I was mistaken that it might have changed.SusunW (talk) 12:39, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Nearly the entire "Governance" section is word-for-word identical in all nominated articles, and that is what brings most (if not all) below the limit. By "duplicated text", I mean only entirely identical sentences or independent clauses. For instance, "The Municipal Council administers the business of the municipality. It is responsible for budgeting and expenditures and producing all required reports for all branches of the municipal administration. Annually it determines educational standards for schools. The Police Commissioners ensure public order and safety. They are tasked with enforcing regulations, distributing materials and administering rulings of general compliance issued by the council." is text that appears word-for-word in all articles. I can provide the full list of text/clauses that I counted as duplicate if you'd like; it is not that long, as I didn't try to nitpick. I would apply the same standards to any article I reviewed or went to promote if I found duplicated text, which I do spot checks for before promotion. Please note that this is not to say your efforts on these articles are not significant. These are all great articles, but they don't meet DYK criteria at this time. Let me know if you decide to propose an alt hook, and I'll review it quickly. ~ Rob^Talk 12:49, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Nvvchar: I don't know if you'd be interested in a adding a bit to them? If not at least you can use my QPQs!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:53, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

BU Rob13 This document Dzidzantún and this document Sinanché are not the same document. If the source documents are not the same, but the text in those documents is the translation will be virtually the same. I have looked at and translated at least 7 documents to create any one of these articles. Individual documents not one single source. Some of them have required looking at 20 or 30 individual documents. I repeat, if 14 separate editors had looked at those sources, you would still have virtually the same text without any one copying from the other. Dr. Blofeld I am not of a mind to let Rob "give us" anything. He is misguided in his analysis, but while every other aspect of Wikipedia rests on consensus DYK lies in the hands of a few who make the final decision of whether they want to "grant" you an appearance based on their individual assessment of the rules or whether things appeal to them personally. I need to walk away. Whatever you decide is good with me. SusunW (talk) 13:21, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Yoninah: As a more experienced DYK editor, could you provide a second opinion about my concerns? ~ Rob^Talk 13:36, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: I think you are wrong in this case; although the text is identical in places it is not the same text copied across articles, it is just that the translation from the sources comes out the same; you can see in the different articles that the number of councilpersons (eye-stabbing term btw; councilors/council members would be much nicer, or even regidor) and their responsibilities differ. Much as I hate these dreadful multi-article hooks, I don't think it is really fair to object to them the basis that translating a very similar document results in very similar text. Belle (talk) 14:36, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@Belle: I did not count similar text in determining what was duplicated. I specifically did not include, in any instance, anything to do with the council members. See User:BU Rob13/DYK duplicate phrases for a full list of what I removed from the prose count. ~ Rob^Talk 14:46, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I perhaps wasn't as clear as I could have been about the councillors and their responsibilities; I was pointing this out as evidence that the Governance section hadn't been copied wholesale between articles (that SusunW had translated each of those documents individually). The problem, I think, is that when she's (I'm going with she for SusunW; apologies if I've got it wrong) come up with an English translation for a phrase that appears in multiple documents she is reusing that translation word for word; this means it is identical while not being copied. Maybe SusunW could go edit the articles and mix up the phrasing a bit, but is that really a worthwhile exercise? Cut her some slack is my gist/plea (though to be honest I'd prefer one municipality article to stand for all of them in DYK and then we could at least have an intersting hook and not a list of place names). Belle (talk) 15:02, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Belle Exactly. You completely understand my point. I could waste time changing the text, but what is the point. There is not one single document from which they are "copied", as Rob is implying. (and yes, "she") SusunW (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I saw myself pinged here. I would first like to commend User:SusunW for all the work she put into these new articles, and also comment User:BU Rob13 for all the work he put in to researching the issue by seeking direction from more experienced editors at WT:DYK and taking the time to prepare a list of the phrases that are copied in each article.

It doesn't make sense to me that material from different websites should produce the exact same English translation. If they really are different websites, and not mirror sites, surely you can alter the text in each article?

Per the responses from Victuallers and Gatoclass to BU Rob13's question, it seems clear that all articles after the first one need at least 1500 characters of new prose after discounting the duplicate phrases. This is not the case with any of the articles listed above. Unless someone is willing to expand all these shorter articles to meet the 1500-character count without counting the duplicate text, I suggest reducing the hook to one article and creating a hookier hook, as User:Jakec suggested initially. Yoninah (talk) 01:28, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes, if we ask the question leaving out pertinent information, we will get the answer that we want. By all means, let's defer to the person who made multiple sneers and snide comments from the beginning of the nomination. I'm done. Truly. I don't really care what you do with them. SusunW (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't believe I left out pertinent information when asking for a clarification on that rule, but I invite the editors who discussed that question to participate here for a more complete discussion. In particular, comments on whether you feel your answers to my question in talk apply in this situation would be appreciated. @Victuallers and Gatoclass: ~ Rob^Talk 01:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I think that some of the etymologies for these municipalities are pretty quirky and would make great hooks if sourced. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 02:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

@Yoninah: The source documents aren't from different sites, they are from different pages on the same site; where the information is the same the source reuses the same phrases. We can see that SusunW didn't just copy text from one article to another (as is suggested in Rob's question on the DYK talk page; quite innocently I'm sure; I don't see anything sneering or snide about it) because where the source varies the information in the articles varies too. What she has done is reuse her translations when she has found that the phrases in the sources are identical, but this does require examining the sources not just cutting and pasting. (I do hate the multiple nom listy hooks though; have I mentioned that?) Belle (talk) 08:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

In case this was misunderstood, I am not implying that the duplicated text is inappropriate or the result of copying articles. Sorry if I gave that impression. It's just duplicated prose, in the sense that the sentences turned out the same, however that happened. ~ Rob^Talk 08:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I came back here only to clarify one thing, I do not think that Rob has been snide, I do think he twisted his question for the answer he wanted in that he actually used the words "copied text" and never mentioned translate. He also never mentioned that they were unique web pages and not a single source document, though the state did produce all of some of it and the country did produce all of some of it. Nor did he go back to those same people who gave him responses when I explained my position but instead called in Yoninah. When I said snide I was speaking of Jakob's comments and I was completely surprised that Yoninah would evoke him to come back in and drop more insults but she did and he did. AGF, Jacob, that if I wrote it in an article, I have a source for it--If you aren't interested in reading the articles to SEE what is in them, please keep your insinuations and POV to yourself. (Maybe you do not understand how insulting your comments appear, Jacob, especially to someone who doesn't even know you.) I have said this before, but it bears repeating your rules are NOT more important than the people who you work with. Now I really am done, not coming back again. Do what you like with them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SusanW (talk • contribs) 13:08, 7 August 2015‎ (UTC)

Reply to @Belle: I don't read Spanish, so I can't look at the source directly. Thank you for explaining they are different pages on the same website. It sounds like the website printed the same information on the various pages, and the page creator therefore printed the same information on the various Wikipedia pages. I think that BU Rob13's hesitation to approve this multi-hook nomination without a 1500-word basis for each article, not including the duplicate phrases, is valid and in line with DYK rules. (Oh, them again.) Yoninah (talk) 15:19, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

As suggested by User:Dr. Blofeld I have added content to each of the above 14 articles. The character count with revised details of prose, after due accounting of the characters reported by User:BU Rob13, in each of the 14 articles now have more than acceptable characters count for DYK. Now up for further review.--Nvvchar. 13:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Hocabá Municipality - 2165 characters
Huhí Municipality - 2004 characters
Sanahcat Municipality - 2024 characters
Sotuta Municipality – 3824 characters
Dzemul Municipality - 2937 characters
Dzilam González Municipality - 1636 characters
Mocochá Municipality - 2086 characters
Muxupip Municipality - 2412 characters
Sinanché Municipality - 2319 characters
Dzidzantún Municipality - 1949 characters
Suma Municipality - 2344 characters
Telchac Puerto Municipality - 1906 characters
Temax Municipality - 2088 characters
Yaxkukul Municipality - 1658 characters

Very well done Nvvchar - I had just atrarted on the same task but I had only managed two and they are already on your list (Temax and Dzemul). Dzemul could manage a seperate hook as they still worship at an ancient Mayan site! Victuallers (talk) 14:39, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I would point out that there was no consensus. Since neither of Rob's original contacts weighed in on the actual case rather than his hypothetical. No changes were required unless consensus was obtained. A small group of people do not get to throw AGF and consensus out the window and make their own rules at DYK. But that being said, Nvvchar you are amazing and deserve all the credit for improving the articles and staying focused on what is best for the encyclopedia. Thank you for making the articles better. SusunW (talk) 15:00, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

- all the above 14 articles have been much expanded by Nvvchar and more than qualifies for DYK.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:46, 10 August 2015 (UTC)