Talk:Ly Singko

Did you know nomination

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 15:29, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Ly Singko—who had been raised in a Catholic household and worked for the Kuomintang's news agency—was imprisoned under Singapore's Internal Security Act for "glamourising the communist system"?
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The King of Comedy Visits Shanghai, Template:Did you know nominations/Melichrus procumbens

Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 173 past nominations.

KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 07:13, 5 December 2024 (UTC).

• At the moment, I'm unsure if I will give this a full review or not, so for now this is just an inquiry: I'm really not sure what the connection is between her growing up in a Catholic household and working for the Kuomintang, to the primary hook fact (the "glamourising" aspect). I understand that there's supposed to be a contrast between the allegation despite him being involved with the Kuomintang, but I suspect that readers will not immediately get the connection. More importantly, the part seems to add unnecessary complexity to the hook: just saying he was imprisoned for "glamourising" should suffice per WP:DYKTRIM since that fact itself is already interesting and the part doesn't seem essential to the hook fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

I just realized that the hook is 198 characters, or just a hair below the 200-character limit, so it definitely needs trimming. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

At least a hundred other suspected communist sympathisers were imprisoned during this period, but I thought what made this especially interesting was that he (not she!!) was Catholic and had worked for the Kuomintang's news agency. The irony should be quite obvious (or so I thought)... And if something is under the limit, albeit just by 2 characters, shouldn't it technically still be permissible? 😅 (As opposed to being 2 characters over...) KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 12:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Kingoflettuce: As mentioned per above, per WP:DYKTRIM, excessive detail and facts should be removed if they are not essential to the hook fact. According to the old rules (and also continued in spirit in the current guidelines), hooks slightly below the 200 character limit can still be rejected per editor discretion. Actually, I've gone ahead and struck it, so a new hook is needed. As for the misgendering, I apologize: the pronouns are now fixed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Well yeah but as I said I thought the details weren't excessive, rather they REALLY added to the "interestingness" of the charges. It'd be like if a Jan 6 participant was found to be a dedicated ActBlue donor or something. Oh well. I sure hope it's not just me who finds the irony much too obvious though! KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 14:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I did a bit of a mini-survey on Discord and all the responses said the original hook was too complex or detailed, so it wasn't just I who had similar views. In any case, please propose a new hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:40, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Sure that's fine, how about ..."... that Chinese-language newspaper columnist Ly Singko was imprisoned for "glamourising the communist system"? Cheers, KINGofLETTUCE 👑 🥬 04:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• Apologies for not coming back to this sooner. The article was new enough and long enough at the time of the nomination. I did not find any close paraphrasing. As all sources are offline I am assuming good faith on their contents, but all statements are sourced. I checked both QPQs and while the reviews are rather short, I am assuming good faith that they checked all of the DYK criteria. The new hook is interesting, though I will leave it to the promoter if it needs further trimming to remove "Chinese-language newspaper columnist" or not. Good to go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)