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 Allen3talk 16:37, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Review Good to go! Meets core policies and guidelines, and in particular: is neutral; cites sources with inline citations; is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism. DYK nomination was timely and article is easily long enough. Every paragraph is cited. Hook references are verified and cited. No copyright violations or too close paraphrasing. Earwig's copy violation detector Melon Soup report gives it a clean bill. The hook is hooky enough, I think, and relates directly to the essence of the article. It is interesting, decently neutral, and appropriately cited. QPQ done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:23, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
I did fill out the references further. Nice job! 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:03, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
.jpg)
Passes DYK checklist.
Good to go! Meets core policies and guidelines, and in particular: is neutral; cites sources with inline citations; is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism. DYK nomination was timely and article is easily long enough. Every paragraph is cited. Hook references are verified and cited. No copyright violations or too close paraphrasing. Earwig's copy violation detector Melon Soup report gives it a clean bill. The hook is hooky enough, I think, and relates directly to the essence of the article. It is interesting, decently neutral, and appropriately cited. QPQ done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:23, 13 October 2015 (UTC)