Template:Did you know nominations/British logistics in the Falklands War
- 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) 06:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
British logistics in the Falklands War
[edit]- ... that British logistics in the Falklands War depended on ships that were STUFT? Source: [1]
5x expanded by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self-nominated at 06:56, 19 November 2017 (UTC).
Earwig is clear. No apparent copy vios or close paraphrasing. 5X Expansion verified. Easily long enough. Timely nominated. Hook is IMO interesting; the subject matter has drama, but the technical side of this effort is detailed and daunting. Told the story well. Hook is supported by in line/on line citation. Every paragraph is cited. QPQ confirmed. Cited source is on line and confirms the hook. I suppose one could criticize the hook, as it depends on a bad pun and an obscure acronym.
- I did not have access to the myriad books in the article that are not on line, and in that sense I AGF
- QPQ confirmed.
- Parenthetically, I did add many categories (to this and several other articles in the subject area), as I discovered that the Wikipedia articles on the Falklands War were willy-nilly and idiosyncratically categorized. Thus, many seminal and related articles were like two unlit ships passing on a moonless night. There seems to be a British/Argentine divide in the articles and their linkage, and that border dispute should not be carried over into our encyclopædia.
- As written, this article is a great addition to Wikipedia's library on the Malvinas War. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 00:44, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
