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
Theleekycauldron (
talk) 05:30, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Moved to mainspace by
AleatoryPonderings (
talk). Self-nominated at 23:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC).
The article is a recently created article that is above stub class. There are no issues with verifiability, as far as I can tell. Looking at the sources, they appear to be reliable. Earwig is not showing me any issues with plagiarism. I would suggest adding the two Kröller works and The Macmillan Dictionary of Canadian Biography to the sources section, unless that change is not in line with your established citation style. As stated in the nomination, the quid pro quo rules have been satisfied. Finally, the first hook is both interesting and present in the article. The alternate one is less interesting. ―
SusmuffinTalk 02:40, 21 September 2021 (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
Theleekycauldron (
talk) 05:30, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Moved to mainspace by
AleatoryPonderings (
talk). Self-nominated at 23:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC).
The article is a recently created article that is above stub class. There are no issues with verifiability, as far as I can tell. Looking at the sources, they appear to be reliable. Earwig is not showing me any issues with plagiarism. I would suggest adding the two Kröller works and The Macmillan Dictionary of Canadian Biography to the sources section, unless that change is not in line with your established citation style. As stated in the nomination, the quid pro quo rules have been satisfied. Finally, the first hook is both interesting and present in the article. The alternate one is less interesting. ―
SusmuffinTalk 02:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)