Template:Did you know nominations/1994 Imam Reza shrine bomb explosion

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:08, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

1994 Imam Reza shrine bomb explosion

edit

Created by Mhhossein (talk). Self-nominated at 12:39, 15 October 2016 (UTC).

  • @Mhhossein: Your QPQ review does not mention a copyvio check. Pppery 14:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
    • The nominator has now added a copyvio check to his review, which makes it complete. Pppery 13:25, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
      • Pppery: Sorry, but your comment is basically nonsense. The review was already complete before your baseless intervention. --Mhhossein talk 15:44, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
  •  : We need a reviewer after that intervention. --Mhhossein talk 09:47, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Long enough, new enough, many refs. Seems balanced. Earwig says "5.7% - violation unlikely. Hook mostly checks out, except that the source for "300" actually says "nearly 300". The article infobox is problemmatic - are we sufficiently sure that MEK organized it? Why are the injured in an "inquiries" field? Johnbod (talk) 02:35, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
@Johnbod: Thanks for the review. I added the word "nearly" for more accuracy, however it makes no problem for the hook as we don't know whether it was really higher or less than 300. Just one of the sources names another organization, i.e. a Pakistani militant, should we name it in the infobox besides MEK? Btw, I corrected the problem with causalities in the infobox. Mhhossein talk 06:15, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok thanks, points resolved. GTG. Johnbod (talk) 16:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)