483:, and Orlady has done a fine job strengthening the presentation (I added Orlady's name to the DYK page credits). I also added a few more sources, as the subject has garnered increased coverage with a spate of violent incidents in October and November 2013. The article is new enough, long enough, well sourced, and no close paraphrasing seen. Hook ref is verified and cited inline. No QPQ necessary for first-time nominator. Good to go.
443:
337:
357:
406:. As currently written, it's not obvious why that short section is included in the article, and that section and the linked article are both flawed by their focus om presenting a dictionary definition rather than telling about a topic. I don't have full-text access to the BMJ source where this topic is discussed and I can't read the Chinese sources cited, but I did find other English-language content:
468:
447:
don't often deal with societal issues), I decided to tackle some of the needed revisions. I haven't done everything that I think might be worth doing, but I've made some fairly extensive revisions. Also, I've edited the proposed hook to resolve the accuracy concern about the number of incidents annually. Someone else will need to review this now, in view of my involvement with the article. --
385:
277:
identifiers (PMIDs), so as I checked the sources, I added them. Several of the sources used are editorials or letters/comments in journals. In this case, we at minimum should have in-text attribution (because although journal-published, these letters are opinion rather than peer-reviewed fact), and
360:
I am nervous about putting an article like this on the Main Page with this amount of content in it. It's just my opinion, but I feel that an article that deals with a problem and/or a primarily negative social phenomenon should have more detail, especially if the article is making such claims as "it
388:
This is a really interesting topic that would make an excellent DYK item, but I share Thingg's concern that the article is not yet ready for main-page display. Particular care is needed in presenting negative social phenomena like this one. This article is a collection of vague generalizations that
286:
is used to cite the hook, which doesn't bother me as this isn't so much a health-related claim as a crime statistic. In other words, although I don't have MEDRS concerns, I do have concerns that the article is sourced to some editorials and comments (which I can't access to better opine on), but
446:
I was hoping that you would undertake a more thorough revision of the article to address the concerns that had been identified here -- these are improvements that are needed regardless of whether the article is used in DYK. However, because I see that your main interest is in medical topics (you
393:.) I edited the lead section to eliminate the dictionary-definition format ("Violence against doctors in China refers to acts of violence...") and to include indications of where the statistics and the "crisis" label came from. More improvements could be made to the rest of the article.
93:
389:
lack context. A particular concern is the presentation of observations/opinions without identifying the sources of the statements. The sources are solid, so there's a good basis for improving the article. (I also found
369:
easily, but I don't think it would be a good idea to link something like that on the main page with so little information. Again though, this is just my opinion and if someone else disagrees, I'm fine with that.
398:
The hook fact is supported by sources, but it isn't quite correct -- it's more than 17,000 incidents, not "up to 17,000." Also, the statement about "crisis" probably shouldn't be made without some sort of
471:
I've read through this discussion and reviewed the article and its sources, and IMO it is a valid "start" article. The subject is a well-founded phenomenon sourced in such papers as
191:
I am a new contributor to DYK and this looks very confusing, so I'd like to contribute this DYK, but am a little unsure about everything (so there might be some formatting errors).
507:
430:
Right. Well, I've made the merge. I tried to use reputable sources for this article. I'd be happy to delist this nomination if it doesn't seem like it's going anywhere. --
362:
278:
considering that sourcing, it might be good to have attribution on most of the claims made in the article (that is, say who is making each of these claims, as you see
413:
36:
88:
315:
I don't support or not-- I only came by to check for MEDRS issues. A regular DYK reviewer, who understands the rest of the criteria, makes that decision.
365:
for an article about a similar topic with similar scope. It's not a requirement of course that articles be that long and I think the article does pass
40:
160:
17:
419:
can and should be folded into the main body of the article, where it discusses the phenomena that lead to attacks on doctors. --
390:
273:
for medical text; I will leave source verification, copyvio checking, etc to other DYK reviewers. The article did not have
44:
143:
83:
479:
325:
297:
113:
345:
214:
118:
410:
435:
309:
242:
196:
182:
304:
Thank you for your input. I take it although you have concerns, you support the DYK nomination?
29:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.
488:
316:
288:
103:
452:
424:
341:
224:
It may look "light" because of the short sections, but it's actually 1785 prose characters.
210:
65:
270:
407:
442:
336:
501:
431:
305:
225:
192:
178:
98:
356:
484:
164:
has been described as a "crisis", with more than 17,000 incidents reported in 2010?
448:
420:
371:
366:
263:
61:
467:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
473:
384:
123:
209:- Hi You'll need 1500 characters of pure prose. This looks a bit light.
415:. From what I've read about the topic, I think that some discussion of
47:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page.
416:
403:
274:
402:
A particular concern with the article is the subsection about
287:
will leave the rest of this to regular DYK reviewers.
266:
148:
185:). Self nominated at 00:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
108:
363:Violence against Indians in Australia controversy
8:
49:No further edits should be made to this page
269:I stopped by to check for compliance with
71:
508:Passed DYK nominations from November 2013
74:
7:
24:
161:violence against doctors in China
135:Violence against doctors in China
18:Template:Did you know nominations
466:
441:
438:) 05:48, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
427:) 04:24, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
383:
355:
335:
455:) 22:28, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
348:) 16:21, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
312:) 00:14, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
300:) 20:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
271:Knowledge's sourcing guidelines
32:Please do not modify this page.
491:) 00:18, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
361:is a crisis". See for example
328:) 01:34, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
217:) 14:12, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
199:) 00:28, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
68:) 06:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
1:
376:00:31, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
254:20:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
45:Knowledge talk:Did you know
37:this nomination's talk page
524:
262:Per the list provided by
119:Find sources (notability)
94:Earwig's Copyvio Detector
480:The Wall Street Journal
41:the article's talk page
109:A Simple Word Counter
89:Reviewer instructions
340:Full review needed.
177:Created/expanded by
114:Reviewers' template
250:
246:
234:
230:
186:
132:
131:
515:
470:
445:
387:
374:
359:
339:
322:
294:
252:
248:
244:
240:
235:
232:
228:
176:
72:
56:The result was:
34:
523:
522:
518:
517:
516:
514:
513:
512:
498:
497:
496:
372:
320:
292:
282:article does).
243:
238:
226:
155:
153:
149:Article history
137:
128:
104:Character count
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
521:
519:
511:
510:
500:
499:
495:
494:
493:
492:
463:
462:
461:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
400:
395:
394:
378:
377:
350:
349:
332:
331:
330:
329:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
219:
218:
201:
200:
174:
173:
172:
171:
166:
165:
152:
151:
146:
144:Back to T:TDYK
140:
138:
136:
133:
130:
129:
127:
126:
121:
116:
111:
106:
101:
96:
91:
86:
80:
77:
76:
54:
53:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
520:
509:
506:
505:
503:
490:
486:
482:
481:
476:
475:
469:
465:
464:
454:
450:
444:
440:
439:
437:
433:
429:
428:
426:
422:
418:
414:
411:
408:
405:
401:
397:
396:
392:
386:
382:
381:
380:
379:
375:
368:
364:
358:
354:
353:
352:
351:
347:
343:
338:
334:
333:
327:
323:
319:
314:
313:
311:
307:
303:
302:
301:
299:
295:
291:
285:
284:The Economist
281:
280:The Economist
276:
272:
268:
265:
253:
236:
223:
222:
221:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
204:
203:
202:
198:
194:
190:
189:
188:
184:
180:
170:
169:
168:
167:
163:
162:
157:
156:
150:
147:
145:
142:
141:
134:
125:
122:
120:
117:
115:
112:
110:
107:
105:
102:
100:
97:
95:
92:
90:
87:
85:
82:
81:
79:
78:
73:
70:
67:
63:
59:
52:
50:
46:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
478:
472:
317:
289:
283:
279:
261:
206:
175:
159:
57:
55:
48:
31:
28:
391:this source
342:BlueMoonset
264:User:Allen3
211:Victuallers
124:Hook length
75:DYK toolbox
474:The Lancet
158:... that
99:QPQ check
84:DYK check
502:Category
432:LT910001
399:context.
306:LT910001
193:LT910001
179:LT910001
58:promoted
485:Yoninah
321:Georgia
293:Georgia
207:Comment
449:Orlady
421:Orlady
417:Yi Nao
404:Yi Nao
373:Thingg
275:PubMed
241:
237:
62:PFHLai
318:Sandy
290:Sandy
267:here,
16:<
489:talk
477:and
453:talk
436:talk
425:talk
367:WP:N
346:talk
326:Talk
310:talk
298:Talk
245:XAЯA
233:ARAX
215:talk
197:talk
183:talk
66:talk
60:by
43:or
504::
412:,
409:,
249:ИA
229:AN
187:.
139:(
39:,
487:(
451:(
434:(
423:(
344:(
324:(
308:(
296:(
251:M
247:b
239:•
231:d
227:M
213:(
195:(
181:(
154:)
64:(
51:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.