Template:Did you know nominations/Meow (cat)

The following discussion 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 Allen3 ^talk 23:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Meow (cat)

(

)

... that Meow, once the world's heaviest cat, gained international attention due to his pursuit to lose weight?

Reviewed: Kill the DJ

Created/expanded by Arius1998 (talk). Self nom at 13:54, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I did not see any problem in the article. The hook is very interesting. I think it is exactly for DYK. Good to go.Egeymi (talk) 19:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

No quid pro quo (QPQ) review has been supplied, and one is required for most authors, including this one, for a nomination to be approved. Please be sure to check for that in future. Nominator should be sure to note their review here, so it can be confirmed. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:45, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

While the sources seem to be okay without a doubt I'd say the style of the references needs proper formatting. At least indicate the newspapers and their (online) publication dates (and author if provided) within the reflist. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 18:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Article was newly created on September 14 with 2385 prose characters, well above the 1500 minimum required. QPQ has been completed. Article is neutral, uses inline reliable sources, and passed a paraphrasing spot-check of three of the sources with Duplication detector. The hook facts are supported by inline sources in the text (and appear in the cited sources). Whoever promotes this to prep may want to smooth out "due to his pursuit to lose weight", which seems a little clunky to me, but not enough to stop this approval. Also not a reason to stop: the statement by Lajbi that "the style of the references needs proper formatting" as a reason not to approve this hook. This is not a DYK requirement. What the rules say are that refs "must not be bare URLs" (see WP:DYKSG, rule D3), and the refs here use the "cite" template and include at least the url, title, and accessdate fields, which is not, by any definition, "bare". It would be nice if the cite templates were more fully filled out, but it is inappropriate to hold up approval for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry it wasn't my intent to hold it 'completely' back just to draw attention to it. At least an editor can do what a simple ref-formatting bot or Reflinks can't. It also helps to check the reliability of them. Lajbi ^{Holla @ me • CP} 09:19, 18 September 2012 (UTC)