Template:Did you know nominations/Trial of Lina E.
- 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 07:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Trial of Lina E.
- ... that upon the announcement of the verdict in the Trial of Lina E., court spectators shouted "fuck class justice" and "you are friends of fascists"? Source: Frankfurter Rundschau quote: "Nach der Urteilsverkündung kam es im Gerichtssaal zu lautstarken Protesten und Tumulten. Zuschauer skandierten „Faschofreunde“ und „Scheiß Klassenjustiz“. Die Sitzung musste deswegen kurzzeitig unterbrochen werden." Translation: "Loud protests and riots erupted in the courtroom after the verdict was announced. Spectators chanted "you are friends of fascists" and "fuck class justice". As a result, the meeting had to be temporarily adjourned."
- Reviewed:
Created by Festucalex (talk). Self-nominated at 16:21, 2 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Trial of Lina E.; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
The article was nominated on time. The hook is reliably sourced, in the article and interesting. Nominator has three credits so is QRQ exempt. I would say on the neutrality of the article that it might be helpful to mention what the government say they are doing about far-right extremism. At the moment it gives the impression that this terrorist group are the only people doing anything.Llewee (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Llewee: I don't think they've actually directly said anything about this, but I think this is covered in the analysis section. 〜 Festucalex • talk 17:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Festucalex and Llewee:
I'm not sure I see a WP:NEVENT pass here, and have tagged the article accordingly. All of the coverage comes from a very short span of time (only a week, since The Left Berlin's coverage from a month prior is a propaganda arm rather than a reliable source), it demonstrates no impact outside of Germany (international sources covered the event, but mostly as local interest). theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:57, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: I dispute this tag. When it comes to the geographical scope, Germany is, I think, large enough to check out the WP:GEOSCOPE guideline. Not every event has to have international impact. As for the time aspect, notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY. Indisputable significant coverage was rendered to this case while it went on, and especially when the case was decided, including (as you mentioned) international coverage. Legal cases usually don't get sustained coverage after they're decided, unless they're Supreme Court decisions. 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, but WP:GEOSCOPE says that
Coverage of an event nationally or internationally may make notability more likely, but such coverage should not be the sole basis for creating an article
. And NEVENT does require sustained coverage in most circumstances, as exemplified by its first criterion – its high bar is the point. Is there any coverage you can point to after the fact, or any reason it is likely to receive sigcov in the future? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:28, 16 July 2023 (UTC)- @Theleekycauldron: GEOSCOPE isn't
the sole basis
here. This case received SIGCOV in German media for months prior to the May 31 verdict (examples: March 30, April 5, April 19). Here, NOTTEMPORARY kicks in. 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)- Well, that'll certainly do it :) I see that the March source is already in the article, so that must have been an oversight on my part. Can The Left Berlin be removed? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: Oh yeah, wasn't me who added that source. Obviously not suitable. I'll replace it. 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:51, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- Awesome, good to go :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: Oh yeah, wasn't me who added that source. Obviously not suitable. I'll replace it. 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:51, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- Well, that'll certainly do it :) I see that the March source is already in the article, so that must have been an oversight on my part. Can The Left Berlin be removed? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Theleekycauldron: GEOSCOPE isn't
- Sure, but WP:GEOSCOPE says that
- @Theleekycauldron: I dispute this tag. When it comes to the geographical scope, Germany is, I think, large enough to check out the WP:GEOSCOPE guideline. Not every event has to have international impact. As for the time aspect, notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY. Indisputable significant coverage was rendered to this case while it went on, and especially when the case was decided, including (as you mentioned) international coverage. Legal cases usually don't get sustained coverage after they're decided, unless they're Supreme Court decisions. 〜 Festucalex • talk 07:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)