Template:Did you know nominations/Guerra del Golfo (2005)
- 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 Montanabw(talk) 21:36, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Guerra del Golfo (2005)
[edit]- ...that the 2005 Guerra del Golfo was the first professional wrestling show to use that name, and would become an annual show from that year on?
- Reviewed: 2016 Sweden riots
Created by MPJ-DK (talk). Self-nominated at 00:08, 5 July 2016 (UTC).
- Could this be combined with Template:Did you know nominations/Guerra del Golfo (2008)? Yoninah (talk) 10:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I did not see a good "hooky", non-boring fact they both have in common so I submitted two very different hooks instead. MPJ-DK 10:55, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- I noticed that you're now nominating all those 70 articles individually, which is not what I or other editors recommended. Please consider creating smaller multi-hooks to use up the hooks efficiently. Without reading this article, you could start with:
- ALT1:
...that the 2005 Guerra del Golfo, the first professional wrestling show to use that name, became an annual show, with installments in 2006, 2007, and 2008?Yoninah (talk) 12:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- So what I have nominated so far are the independent ones, easier to come up with hooks for. The Guerra del Golfo are the only two from the same series i put up. I did not try to go.that route since there are shows through 2016, I did not want an arbitrary cut off, but there are too many to link and stay under 200 characters. Trying to balance what people reccomend against what got my original hook rejected (boring) may be too much of a challenge for me to even try to fit 10 aericles in one hook. That is why i put up the easy ones first. Not sure how the multi ones shake out. MPJ-DK 16:42, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:01, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced. As sources are either offline or foreign-language, unable to check for close paraphrasing. Hook is interesting but the hook facts are not supported by inline cites; in fact, the first paragraph under Background lacks any citations, per Rule D2. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 16:12, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
