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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Overall: Barely long enough. Hawkeye7(discuss) 21:14, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing the length! Seeing how close it was (about 200 characters above the minimum), I also considered trying to trim and rephrase things until the DYK check reported exactly 1,500 characters while retaining the same information, but that started seeming like a time-suck. So I left it as is. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:40, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
Some editors specialise in writing 1,500-character articles, regarding anything more as a waste of effort. Hawkeye7(discuss) 00:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)