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
Yoninah (
talk) 17:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by
Sadads (
talk). Self-nominated at 01:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC).
This is a newly-promoted GA and is long enough and submitted within the correct time frame. The image is appropriately licensed, the article is neutral and I detected no close paraphrasing or other policy issues. The hook is written as if this fact is a general view whereas it is the comment of a single scholar. Could you redraft the hook or offer a different one and I will review it. You seem to have five or more DYKs so I think you need to do a QPQ review of another nomination.
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 09:43, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
@
Cwmhiraeth:Sorry for the long reply, been off wiki a lot lately (took a week for vacation, etc.). Did the QPQ: forgot about that, been a while since I did DYK:
Template:Did you know nominations/Harvard Environmental Law Review. Fixed the DYK hook, so that its clear that its an opinion. Sorry again for the long wait,
Sadads (
talk) 02:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
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
Yoninah (
talk) 17:36, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by
Sadads (
talk). Self-nominated at 01:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC).
This is a newly-promoted GA and is long enough and submitted within the correct time frame. The image is appropriately licensed, the article is neutral and I detected no close paraphrasing or other policy issues. The hook is written as if this fact is a general view whereas it is the comment of a single scholar. Could you redraft the hook or offer a different one and I will review it. You seem to have five or more DYKs so I think you need to do a QPQ review of another nomination.
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 09:43, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
@
Cwmhiraeth:Sorry for the long reply, been off wiki a lot lately (took a week for vacation, etc.). Did the QPQ: forgot about that, been a while since I did DYK:
Template:Did you know nominations/Harvard Environmental Law Review. Fixed the DYK hook, so that its clear that its an opinion. Sorry again for the long wait,
Sadads (
talk) 02:14, 28 November 2016 (UTC)