Template:Did you know nominations/Virago (horse)

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 14:38, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Virago (horse)

(

)

... that in 1854, the filly Virago won the 1,000 Guineas, the Goodwood Cup, the Nassau Stakes, the Yorkshire Oaks, and the Doncaster Cup, in total ten of eleven races she entered that year?

Created/expanded by Tigerboy1966 (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 10:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a filly! Would this be a good DYK for use on March 8th, International Women's Day? Need a speedy review? --PFHLai (talk) 10:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Nominator has reviewed 5+ articles. Expander has 5+ DYKs to their credits. This looks like an attempt to circumvent the QPQ process.
Article is not fully supported by inline citations. It has multiple fact tags.
Hook is properly formatted and interesting and neutral enough. Image has a copyright tag. Article is neutral enough. Hook is supported by text in the article and that is properly cited.
Offline sources support text and are plagiarism free. --LauraHale (talk) 23:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Inline citations need to be done, and one of the two parties involved here should really do a QPQ because 5+ DYK noms/credits each looks like circumvention. Once fact tags are cleared and a QPQ is possibly done, it will be good to go. --LauraHale (talk) 23:59, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I have added all the citations requested, taken out one unsourced statement, and removed the tags. Thanks for the feedback. I haven't tried to circumvent anything. I just write articles. If they get nominated for DYK I am very flattered. Tigerboy1966 01:08, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Blog sources make me nervous. Is there consensus that blogs are acceptable for horse articles? :( Fact tag still remaining. Some one should absolutely do a QPQ between the pair of you because you have 5+ DYKs and nominator has nominated 5+ so it looks like circumvention. --LauraHale (talk) 01:12, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out, I have replaced the blog reference with something more reputable and removed the tag. Tigerboy1966 01:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Referencing issues have been addressed, so this is good to go. Under current DYK rules, there is no requirement for a QPQ. Moswento (talk | contribs) 10:08, 15 March 2012 (UTC)