Jump to content

Talk:Hal Malchow

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 23:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • ... that Hal Malchow briefly worked as a securities lawyer, but left because writing contracts defending against fraud was more boring than scheming them? Source: Issenberg, Sasha (2013). The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns. ISBN 9780307954800. p. 2: "except for a brief detour into securities law that ended when he realized that writing the contracts to guard against complex financial schemes was less fun than trying to hatch them."
    • ALT1: ... that Hal Malchow was detained in a Lima, Peru, airport because he was accused of smuggling cocaine in his arm cast? Source: "Three Americans held in Peru pending drug investigation outcome". The Greenville News. Vol. 113, no. 25. AP News. January 25, 1987. p. 3A.
    • Reviewed:
Created by SWinxy (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

SWinxy (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and 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: The article presents a comprehensive overview of Malchow's life, career, and contributions to political consulting, and meets the newness, length, sourcing, neutrality, and copyvio-free criteria. Offline sources were accepted in good faith. he article and hook meet all the required criteria for inclusion in the DYK section of Wikipedia, with no subjective issues identified. el.ziade (talkallam) 09:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • unpromoted per Special:Diff/1219998585 RoySmith (talk) 13:07, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Striking ALT1 due to WP:BLP issues; original hook struck because "scheming them" is confusing given the context: what does scheming a contract even mean? Please propose a new hook. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I strongly disagree with you that ALT1 is "negative" and a BLP issue. The wording is clear that he was accused, not convicted, of smuggling cocaine. It plainly does not violate BLP because it's sourced to the Associated Press, considered generally reliable at WP:RSP. Being accused of smuggling narcotics in an arm cast is unusual, quirky, absurd. ALT1 can be modified slightly to say that Malchow "was once detained" to lessen a perception that crime is Malchow's MO. But I find it odd to read it this way. SWinxy (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • SWinxy, it isn't just me: the consensus I'm seeing in the WT:DYK thread is that ALT1 is both negative and a BLP issue. "Accused" and "detained" both sound bad, and to add "once" would simply be read by most people that it happened in the past, not that it happened to him only once in his life: either way, he's painted as a drug smuggler on Wikipedia's front page. I strongly advise you to come up with an ALT2 that features a different set of facts, since ALT1—though you clearly like it—isn't going to be accepted at DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • The two concurring with you made their replies before I addressed your claim of it being a BLP issue. It's unfair to mark "consensus!" at the time right before I made my rebuttal to allow my point to be considered, and without responding directly to the rebuttal of the argument you made. I liked it and think it's interesting, yeah. el.ziade seemed to think so too in approving it, PrimalMustelid promoted it, and RoySmith said that I don't see anything in particular that's a problem here in opening it up for discussion. Pinging Schwede66 for completion. Sorry for dragging this out, but I just think it's a fine premise for a hook. Could it be reworded in a way that retains it? SWinxy (talk) 15:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SWinxy: Any hook ideas? Z1720 (talk) 13:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alt2 ... that during his career, Hal Malchow consulted for every Democratic presidential nominee from 1988 through 2004?
Alt3 ... that during his career, Hal Malchow consulted for every Democratic presidential nominee from 1988 through 2004, over 30 senatorial campaigns, and 20 gubernatorial campaigns?
--evrik (talk) 16:35, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Evrik, I have no objection to either alt2 or alt3. Both are referenced in the Washington Post piece. Thank you for your help! el.ziade (talkallam) 10:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like that! SWinxy (talk) 17:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, the ALT2 fact - which is the hook I would approve per WP:DYKTRIM - is only in the lead, and does not have an end-of-sentence citation, and I also don't see where the 1988 nominee is mentioned.--Launchballer 09:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hal_Malchow&oldid=1225523060"