Template:Did you know nominations/No kid zone
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
β
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
No kid zone
- ... that the National Library of Korea is a no kid zone?
- Reviewed:
Created by Clovermoss (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.
Clovermossπ (talk) 22:19, 12 July 2024 (UTC).
- Noting that I have since found another source that goes into this in more detail: [1]. Children under sixteen are banned unless they are given special permission to enter the library. Clovermossπ (talk) 01:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Still needs a QPQ, but beyond that the sourcing looks good. Article is eligible and in good shape. I see no evidence of copyvio. Looks like it all checks out here once a QPQ is done. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 08:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Generalissima: This is my fourth DYK nomination, I haven't hit five yet. Clovermossπ (talk) 12:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- All that said, it might be best to wait a few days before approval to make sure everything is still good now that there's been some bold content additions. Clovermossπ (talk) 13:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Generalissima: I think everything is sorted out now if you want to take another look. Clovermossπ (talk) 02:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Sorry I missed that you haven't had 5 noms yet! It looks good; I like when DYK can improve articles like that. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 02:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- All that said, it might be best to wait a few days before approval to make sure everything is still good now that there's been some bold content additions. Clovermossπ (talk) 13:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Generalissima: This is my fourth DYK nomination, I haven't hit five yet. Clovermossπ (talk) 12:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I put this in an edit comment, but since it's relevant to the hook I'll share here too.
- The way the hook is presented feels a bit punchy, as if children are being excluded from a friendly public library and not like from a library of similar stature to the US Library of Congress. The National Library of Korea generally has a serious academic reputation, and there are numerous local libraries in Seoul for all ages. I'm a bit skeptical of this library being used as a talking point like this (although this talking point is used in both SK/English-language media), although I do personally agree with the conclusion being drawn. The hook is true and I won't challenge it, but just wanted to share context for it. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I notice you've added some content cited to Korean language sources to the article. English sources didn't provide any context about other libraries (and some stated that other libraries were also no kid zones). Obviously the language cited doesn't matter for verifiability, just whether or not the given source is a reliable one. I don't speak Korean so I'm unsure if this source is reliable [2]. I'd appreciate a second opinion here. Clovermossπ (talk) 12:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's the weekly edition of Kyunghyang Shinmun, article by this reporter. The reporter seems to be employed by the newspaper; the piece specifically cited is just a casual society piece. It's not a particularly important ref; you can remove if want. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 13:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for that context. Unless the publication is known for publishing unreliable content, it's probably fine. Could you provide some background on this source too? I just want to make sure there's really strong sourcing for the when statements here. Clovermossπ (talk) 13:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's Yonhap News Agency, one of the largest news agencies in South Korea. No particular strong particular leaning that I know of and is considered among the most reliable in Korea. Anything in particular about the article you'd like to know? 211.43.120.242 (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- κ²½κΈ°μΌλ³΄ is Kyeonggi Ilbo, a regional newspaper for Gyeonggi Province. No particular strong reputation that I know of; just a local paper. The Chosun Ilbo is a newspaper of record, and only cited for one sentence where it's reporting the results of a survey. The only source that's a little sus is OhmyNews in the image caption; the only reason I added that was because that's where the image comes from and it's a fairly innocuous claim being cited. Please lmk if there's any other concerns. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing in particular comes to mind (I'll let you know if anything comes up), I just wanted to make sure everything was good since I don't speak the language. Thanks for humouring me on this. Clovermossπ (talk) 14:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Really thanks for being patient with me, sorry for stepping in. I normally would not but the topic sensitivity and potential real life impact of readership is what motivated it. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm generally of the belief that the more editors the merrier. Thank you for sharing your expertise. :) Clovermossπ (talk) 14:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Really thanks for being patient with me, sorry for stepping in. I normally would not but the topic sensitivity and potential real life impact of readership is what motivated it. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 14:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing in particular comes to mind (I'll let you know if anything comes up), I just wanted to make sure everything was good since I don't speak the language. Thanks for humouring me on this. Clovermossπ (talk) 14:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks for that context. Unless the publication is known for publishing unreliable content, it's probably fine. Could you provide some background on this source too? I just want to make sure there's really strong sourcing for the when statements here. Clovermossπ (talk) 13:15, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's the weekly edition of Kyunghyang Shinmun, article by this reporter. The reporter seems to be employed by the newspaper; the piece specifically cited is just a casual society piece. It's not a particularly important ref; you can remove if want. 211.43.120.242 (talk) 13:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I notice you've added some content cited to Korean language sources to the article. English sources didn't provide any context about other libraries (and some stated that other libraries were also no kid zones). Obviously the language cited doesn't matter for verifiability, just whether or not the given source is a reliable one. I don't speak Korean so I'm unsure if this source is reliable [2]. I'd appreciate a second opinion here. Clovermossπ (talk) 12:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)