Template:Did you know nominations/Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox

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 Allen3 ^talk 14:16, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox

(

)

... ~~that in Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox it was held that an internet blogger was not a member of the media?~~

Reviewed: Exempt from review requirement; I've only done two previous DYKs (and this isn't a selfnom.)

Created/expanded by Xxiao ucb (talk). Nominated by Kgorman-ucb (talk) at 21:37, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

New, long enough, generally seems to follow guidelines (I found one trivial problem - a link to a redirect) and is inline-cited, the hook fact is well-sourced. The only problem is the passive voice - see WP:WEASEL - in the hook. The passive voice also means that the reader has to guess which English-speaking country this is about - this encyclopedia is not the unitedstates.wikipedia.org :). Also, some newbies may not know what a blog is; a blog that is on the internet but not on the world wide web might better be called e.g. a private mailing list or a usenet rant on a usenet group that allows "personal" rants; and "internet blogger" doesn't seem to distinguish internet bloggers from non-internet bloggers (graffiti artists? singers who blog with sound waves? poets?) Anyway, with ALT1, this is good to go by me. Boud (talk) 23:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that in Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox a court in Oregon, United States held that a blogger was not a member of the media?