Template:Did you know nominations/Battlefield Vegas

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 SL93 (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Battlefield Vegas

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Battlefield Vegas employees during the 2017 Las Vegas shooting drove several armored personnel carriers to Mandalay Bay to shield police officers at the request of a LVMPD sergeant?
  Sources:

  1. Jacob, Kathleen (2018-06-08). "Battlefield Vegas sends armored vehicles to help on 1 October". KVVU-TV. Archived from the original on 2021-07-26. Retrieved 2021-07-26.

     The article notes: "We now know the company Battlefield Vegas provided armored vehicles to protect police on 1 October. They tell FOX5 police called them for help during the shooting and they immediately jumped into action. In the 9-1-1 records released by metro, a phone call can be heard from Battlefield Vegas to police. The call is from their operations manager informing the operator they were asked to come by a sergeant. They give a description of their vehicles and their exact location."

  2. Poppa, Doug (2017-11-11). "Las Vegas SWAT Team no show night of massacre, delayed entry into gunman's room". The Baltimore Examiner. Archived from the original on 2021-07-26. Retrieved 2021-07-26.

     The article notes: "The LVMPD requested the assistance of the other three SWAT Teams in Clark County that night; The FBI, Henderson Police and North Las Vegas SWAT Teams. They also requested three armored vehicles from a private company, Battlefield Vegas."

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/WBAW (AM)

Created by Cunard (talk). Self-nominated at 05:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was new enough at time of nomination, and appears well sourced and neutral. Hook is cited and interesting. Earwig not picking up any copyvio besides quotations, and qpq has been provided. BuySomeApples (talk) 15:50, 13 August 2021 (UTC)