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  MPJ-DK  23:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Andrew Butchart[edit]

• ... that in 2016, Andrew Butchart broke the Scottish 5000 metres record, despite running the last lap of the race with only one shoe?

• Reviewed: Gulabrai Ramchand
• Comment: Can we save for 14 October (his birthday)?

Created by Joseph2302 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:05, 16 August 2016 (UTC).

• Article is new enough and long enough. Is "trains at" (text) the same as "is a member of" (source)? Also not sure if "professional athlete" is adequately sourced. Where is the "Fanny Blankers - Koen Games" sourced from? "Was recorded a time" is ungrammatical. Sources seem reliable enough and no neutrality issues visible. No evidence of copyvio/plagiarism. Hook fact is interesting, short enough and has an inline citation. QPQ is done, wondering whether it may need more details on sourcing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:31, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

• [1] says "As Scotland's Andrew Butchart prepares to board the plane for the Rio Olympics, the Dunblane distance runner enjoyed a final training session with his coach Derek Easton and his training group at Central Athletic Club at the University of Stirling." which clearly indicates he trains at the club.
• Changed "professional athlete" to "full-time athlete", per the source.
• Opening paragraph of [2] says it was at the FKG Games.
• "Was" removed from "was recorded a time".
• Jo-Jo Eumerus How does it need more details on the sourcing? Every sentence is sourced, except a few where 2 sources are at the end of a block of text about 1 event, and those sources support all the content. Joseph2302 06:32, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

  Joseph2302 The sourcing question was about the QPQ review. Did you vet the article for text<--source integrity? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:45, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

• Jo-Jo Eumerus Yes I did, all the sources are reliable- in fact the sources are mainly CricketArchive and ESPNcricinfo, both of which are commonly used reliable sources for cricket articles. The other sources are reliable newspapers. Is there any specific concern that you have with the QPQ? After all, the DYK nom has now been approved, and my QPQ is already longer/more detailed than most others that I've seen. Joseph2302 22:33, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

  Generally, I expect that the review of a DYK candidate include a check if the claims made by the article match the sources. It is not clear from your QPQ whether you did check the article in this way - I often find a number of small errors when doing an accuracy check. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

• Yes I did check the article, and no small errors found. The article has since been run on DYK with no changes to the article, so obviously there weren't any actual errors for me to find. Joseph2302 22:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

  then, I did check some more recently added text and still no concerns. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:48, 21 August 2016 (UTC)