The result was: promoted by
Vaticidalprophet
talk 10:08, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Improved to Good Article status by Chiswick Chap ( talk). Nominated by Cessaune ( talk) at 03:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Plant (2nd nomination); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
QPQ: None required. |
Overall: Hiya. Review as follows: article is new enough, long enough, well-sourced neutral and plagiarism-free. Hook is cited, but I have no idea what is it saying, as a non-expert, and it seems that readers would be more likely to click on the genome article rather than the plant article. QPQ not needed. Pamzeis ( talk) 14:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Vaticidalprophet
talk 10:08, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Improved to Good Article status by Chiswick Chap ( talk). Nominated by Cessaune ( talk) at 03:28, 27 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Plant (2nd nomination); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
QPQ: None required. |
Overall: Hiya. Review as follows: article is new enough, long enough, well-sourced neutral and plagiarism-free. Hook is cited, but I have no idea what is it saying, as a non-expert, and it seems that readers would be more likely to click on the genome article rather than the plant article. QPQ not needed. Pamzeis ( talk) 14:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)