Template:Did you know nominations/Nathan Cohen (rower)
- The following discussion 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 05:20, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Nathan Cohen (rower)
[edit]
- ... that New Zealand rower Nathan Cohen (pictured), Olympic champion and two-time world champion, has an irregular heartbeat?
- Reviewed: Myer Feldman
5x expanded by Epeefleche (talk). Self nominated at 20:06, 30 October 2013 (UTC).
- The article is long enough. Expansion began on 29 October 2013, which means it is also new enough. QPQ has been done. The hook is not too long (121 characters) and is properly cited, though not immediatelly after hook assertion, but at the end of paragraph.
The article contains a dozen single sentence paragraphs which inhibit the flow of the text and should be avoided per MOS:LINEBREAKS (this is just an improvement opportunity, not affecting this review). Just a thought (also without affect on the review): is it better to use past tense in case of irregular heartbeat, since he does not have all the time irregular heartbeat and also he is working with medical specialists to determine how to treat it when it occur? Since I don't have an OTRS account I would appreciate if editor who would promote this nomination could double-check to confirm the permission. 
Good to go (note: please someone who has OTRS account check OTRS permission before promoting this hook together with image). --Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:42, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
- As to the tense, irregular heartbeat is a condition -- one that he has -- which is why present tense is appropriate. As to checking OTRS permission, if that is required by all means do so, but I think that's unusual as a DYK review request.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:18, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
- To me the verb tense isn't an issue, but most of the time people with SVT have regular heartbeats, both day-to-day and during SVT episodes. The issue usually isn't an irregular rhythm, but just a very fast rate. Cardiac dysrhythmia is a better descriptor, but may be too technical for DYK. I don't know... if the sources use irregular, we might be stuck with that, even though it's not quite right. EricEnfermero HOWDY! 03:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- If we avoid OR--and intstead look to what the RS refs state--the RSs (as reflected) refer to him having "an irregular heartbeat that first bothered him in a series of training races" and "an irregular heartbeat" -- which is what we mirror. And they refer to his irregular heartbeat as a "a heart condition" and say he "seeks medical treatment for a heart condition".--Epeefleche (talk) 04:23, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- The article is long enough. Expansion began on 29 October 2013, which means it is also new enough. QPQ has been done. The hook is not too long (121 characters) and is properly cited, though not immediatelly after hook assertion, but at the end of paragraph.
I think it would be fairly easy to establish that this condition is associated with a regular heartbeat and to avoid the reference that refers to it as irregular. I think it's just an example of how reliable sources so often confuse medical details. I do respect the need to keep DYK as a fairly lightweight process though. EricEnfermero HOWDY! 04:54, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- We have multiple RSs referring to it as a heart condition that is an irregular heartbeat. As indicated above and in the article. Its clearly a Cardiac dysrhythmia -- in fact that's the only wp category it is in. And our wp article describes that, in its first sentence, as (emphasis provided) "(also known as arrhythmia or irregular heartbeat) is any of a group of conditions in which the electrical activity of the heart is irregular or is faster or slower than normal.". I see no reason not to follow the RSs, frankly. Nor for a wp:or discussion -- which, even if we had one, would lead us back to the same place.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:13, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- I can see your perspective. I apologize for the OR nature of this. Thought it was easier to bring up the discrepancy here. Adding a source to the article that characterizes SVT as a fast, typically regular rhythm - that just seemed a clunky way to go about things if some simple rewording would fix it. I can understand how our own dysrhythmia entry is confusing though; dysrhythmias definitely include irregular rhythms, as well as regular ones that are slow or fast (like SVT). I didn't mean to take this so far off course. Let's leave it how it is. I don't think a word or two is worth a lot of frustration. EricEnfermero HOWDY! 05:35, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. Agreed. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 05:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
- I can see your perspective. I apologize for the OR nature of this. Thought it was easier to bring up the discrepancy here. Adding a source to the article that characterizes SVT as a fast, typically regular rhythm - that just seemed a clunky way to go about things if some simple rewording would fix it. I can understand how our own dysrhythmia entry is confusing though; dysrhythmias definitely include irregular rhythms, as well as regular ones that are slow or fast (like SVT). I didn't mean to take this so far off course. Let's leave it how it is. I don't think a word or two is worth a lot of frustration. EricEnfermero HOWDY! 05:35, 2 November 2013 (UTC)