Talk:Roland Tan
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Yoninah in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Roland Tan appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 June 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-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: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 10:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
( )
- ... that Roland Tan was the most wanted fugitive in Singapore but remained at large for 50 years until his death on 4 April 2020 in Denmark?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/David MacDougall
- Comment: Hook alts more than welcome--probs the most riveting criminal profile the island nation has ever had
Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Self-nominated at 08:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC).
- Article created and nominated on the same day. Long enough and meets basic policy requirements. Passes spotcheck and earwigs. Hook is interesting enough and cited inline. However, the reference Once Singapore's most wanted, gangster Roland Tan dies after 51 years on the run (The Strait Times Singapore) requires a log in or subscription. Please could you put the appropriate lock sign to signify this, especially as this ref has been used in multiple places. Also you forgot the talk page.
- After you fix these small points, I will request this DYK nom to be put on hold for sometime, in case anyone has a better hook, as per noms comment. (If the nom wants this passed without any alt hook suggestion please let me know).
DTM (talk) 09:28, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah sure, both done, although technically neither points raised are DYK requirements (especially the talk page bit). Thanks anyway! Kingoflettuce (talk) 10:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Kingoflettuce Thanks. You hadn't mentioned which citation supports the DYK hook. So if I were to take the one mentioned above, it would be important since the final tick would not be the green one but rather the blue one signifying "reference behind a paywall accepted in good faith".
- So do you want to wait for dyk suggestions? Or maybe give yourself time too to think of something else? DTM (talk) 10:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
- Think it's going to be the latter option regardless in light of the offline sources that I've cited, which I unfortunately can't make available online. It's not just about sources pertaining to the hook, obviously--I presume you've reviewed the whole article so you'd know. I like this hook actually, it was just a casual comment Kingoflettuce (talk) 10:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. I have rounded the number in the hook down to 50 years in case anybody wants to quibble about the time period. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)(UTC)
