Template:Did you know nominations/Qin Huasun
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Qin Huasun
- ... that when Qin Huasun was the Permanent Representative of China to the UN, China vetoed UNSC resolutions of sending United Nations peacekeeping forces to Guatemala and Macedonia?
- Source: Guatemala: China Asserts Taiwan's Ties To Guatemala Led to Veto
Macedonia: China Vows Veto of Macedonia Force Renewal
Created by Toadboy123 (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 32 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.Toadboy123 (talk) 12:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC).
Not interesting and a coatrack, since Huasun is surely not the person who made these decisions. (t · c) buidhe 00:07, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Buidhe: As Qin represented his country in the UNSC, he made the decision based on his country's political position. However, prior to 2011, China's vetoes in the UNSC were rare and only four times [1] were it used prior to the start of the 21st century. Since the mentioned vetoes were related to sending peacekeeping troops, it might be interesting as the users would look into the article to see why the peacekeeping resolutions were vetoed. However, if you any ideas for another hook in the article or if I should modify it in a certain phrasing, I am happy to consider that. - Toadboy123 (talk) 09:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC).
- Yes, I know how the UN works. Certainly the hook phrasing makes it sound like a coatrack. Frankly not all articles are suited for DYK and this one may not be. Peacekeeping is not inherently dull but UN resolutions can be, especially if there is no real information what the vote is really about. Furthermore, the article as it stands does not qualify due to sourcing. (t · c) buidhe 13:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Buidhe: Is there anything that I should do to improve the article such as adding more reliable sources or expanding the information regarding the reasons of the vetoed resolutions so that the article can be featured in DYK ? Or does the article does not have the information much needed for the DYK? I can improve the article based on your suggestions but if you feel there is no room for it in DYK then you can cancel this nomination. - Toadboy123 (talk) 02:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC).
- @Buidhe: I have added detailed information on the vetoed UN resolutions. Let me know if anything more has to be done. - Toadboy123 (talk) 06:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC).
- @Buidhe: Is there anything that I should do to improve the article such as adding more reliable sources or expanding the information regarding the reasons of the vetoed resolutions so that the article can be featured in DYK ? Or does the article does not have the information much needed for the DYK? I can improve the article based on your suggestions but if you feel there is no room for it in DYK then you can cancel this nomination. - Toadboy123 (talk) 02:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC).
- Yes, I know how the UN works. Certainly the hook phrasing makes it sound like a coatrack. Frankly not all articles are suited for DYK and this one may not be. Peacekeeping is not inherently dull but UN resolutions can be, especially if there is no real information what the vote is really about. Furthermore, the article as it stands does not qualify due to sourcing. (t · c) buidhe 13:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Buidhe: As Qin represented his country in the UNSC, he made the decision based on his country's political position. However, prior to 2011, China's vetoes in the UNSC were rare and only four times [1] were it used prior to the start of the 21st century. Since the mentioned vetoes were related to sending peacekeeping troops, it might be interesting as the users would look into the article to see why the peacekeeping resolutions were vetoed. However, if you any ideas for another hook in the article or if I should modify it in a certain phrasing, I am happy to consider that. - Toadboy123 (talk) 09:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC).
Since I have not heard any response from the previous reviewer, can a new reviewer check the updates to the hook I made and if it is good to go? - Toadboy123 (talk) 03:59, 15 May 2024 (UTC).
Much to whinge about here I'm afraid. As written, the biography section would deserve {{subsections}}, and much of its early paragraphs can feel more than a bit WP:Proseline at times and would deserve {{prose}}. None of the hook has an end-of-sentence citation, and given that WP:CLUMP says that "more than three [references] should generally be avoided", I'm not going through four. Take your time, and ping me when these are remedied.--Launchballer 10:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: I have made the edits to the article based on the suggestions you made. Check and let me know if it is good to go now. - Toadboy123 (talk) 02:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC).
- It's a bit better, but you need a cite for "February 2000".--Launchballer 14:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: Added citation. Let me know if all is good now. - Toadboy123 (talk) 03:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's a bit better, but you need a cite for "February 2000".--Launchballer 14:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Launchballer: I have made the edits to the article based on the suggestions you made. Check and let me know if it is good to go now. - Toadboy123 (talk) 02:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC).
