- 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) 17:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Banana pasta
edit- ... that banana pasta is lower in calories and fat, higher in protein, and less expensive to produce compared to whole wheat pasta? (Sources: [1], [2])
- Reviewed: Mary Ivy Burks
Created by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:53, 15 March 2017 (UTC).
- New:Yes. Long enough:yes. Within policy: yes. Within policy: yes. Format:good. Content: good. QPG: yes JANAE2290 (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
New enough, long enough, meets core content policies. Hook cited to RS. GTG. Jakob (talk) 14:59, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
- I prefer this hook, which was approved by another editor. I see nothing wrong with this hook, whereas a simpler hook may not interest readers as much. Also, adding yet more information to this hook would make it too wordy, imo. North America1000 22:29, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Northamerica1000: Sorry I wasn't clear. The hook is fine. It's the article I'm talking about. Yoninah (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
- Banana pasta is a pasta product, so it's straightforward. Bread and pizza dough is not typically made from pasta. It's unclear how I could add content about pizza dough and bread being made from pasta, because it typically isn't. Are you confusing this topic with banana flour? North America1000 16:40, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- I added more content stating that it is cooked by boiling, and about it's higher water higher absorption rate compared to standard pasta (diff). North America1000 17:07, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- I have also added content about how it can be dried for later use (diff). North America1000 17:10, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, that brings it up to start level, IMO. If you wish, you could break out some of the lead description into a new section, "Description", but that won't hold up the DYK. No close paraphrasing seen in new material. Restoring tick per Jakob Coles' review. Yoninah (talk) 17:21, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
