Talk:Recovering America's Wildlife Act
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Flibirigit in topic Did you know nomination
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
edit- 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: rejected by Flibirigit (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the Recovering America's Wildlife Act, which is currently in the United States Congress, would allocate $1.3 billion to protect species at risk of extinction? Source: "The bill would provide $1.3 billion in annual funding for conservation efforts aimed at supporting at-risk, endangered, and other species."
- ALT1: ... that the Recovering America's Wildlife Act would allocate $1.3 billion to protect species at risk of extinction? Source: "The bill would provide $1.3 billion in annual funding for conservation efforts aimed at supporting at-risk, endangered, and other species."
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Andrea Rinaldi.
- Comment: ALT1 is the same, just reworded.
Created by Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk), Ganesha811 (talk), Abjanssen2023 (talk), Asema1957 (talk), Alpha Piscis Austrini (talk), and Nick Number (talk). Nominated by Augusthorsesdroppings10 (talk) at 19:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC).
Unfortunately, due to the article being created on June 14, 2022, and the nomination occurring in September, this would be ineligible as the window for the article to be nominated was lapsed by a couple of months. Though I would not be discouraged by this DYK-ready review. I think ALT 1 would certainly be a good hook if the article were expanded five-fold or nominated for good article status in the future. I encourage the nominator to revisit this nomination in the future. Adog (Talk・Cont) 03:17, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
- The article is ineligible for DYK at this time as per WP:DYKCRIT 1a. The article could become eligible if it achieves GA status. Flibirigit (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2022 (UTC)