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 Allen3talk 09:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Article doesn't mention any other Australians. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 00:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Erk. Embarrassed. Thought it was in there. :( Added now. --
LauraHale (
talk) 00:18, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
New enough, long enough, well referenced. No images to check, no close paraphrasing found. Hook is fairly interesting, referenced, short enough. Prose in the article is a little rough, but at a standard acceptable for DYK methinks. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 12:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
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 Allen3talk 09:46, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Article doesn't mention any other Australians. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 00:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Erk. Embarrassed. Thought it was in there. :( Added now. --
LauraHale (
talk) 00:18, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
New enough, long enough, well referenced. No images to check, no close paraphrasing found. Hook is fairly interesting, referenced, short enough. Prose in the article is a little rough, but at a standard acceptable for DYK methinks. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 12:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)