Template:Did you know nominations/Borderlands 2: Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep

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 reviewer, closed by BorgQueen (talk) 20:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Borderlands 2: Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep is Borderlands 2's fourth and final campaign DLC? Source: https://www.destructoid.com/hands-on-with-borderlands-2s-take-on-dungeons-dragons/
  • ALT1: ... that the Borderlands universe has its own version of Dungeons & Dragons, titled "Bunkers & Badasses"? Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/2013/06/25/borderlands-2-tiny-tinas-assault-on-dragon-keep-review
  • ALT2: ... that Borderlands 2's Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep inspired a spin-off game set after its events? Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/borderlands-tiny-tina-wonderlands-characters-weapons-loot-enemies-ign-expo-summer-of-gaming
  • Reviewed:

Created by B3251 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:15, 8 July 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Borderlands 2: Tiny Tina's Assault on Dragon Keep; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• The article was nominated on time and meets length and newness requirements. I didn't find any close paraphrasing. I think only ALT1 has broad appeal and isn't reliant on knowledge of Borderlands, the other two hooks seem more niche. However, the sentence that states the "It has its own D&D version" lacks a footnote, with the reference confirming it coming in the next sentence. Per DYK rules, it should be the actual hook fact that has a footnote and not just the other sentences. In addition, I have some concerns that the hook is cited to a Forbes article, particularly one that's written by a non-staff member. While I'm willing to accept the reliability in good faith, others may object given that non-staff Forbes articles are marked as generally unreliable at WP:RSP, so if possible, could an additional source also be provided to support the hook? Indeed, there's a big orange tag on the article about source reliability on the article. I note that the QPQ checker doesn't list any prior DYK credits: can you please confirm if this is indeed your first DYK nomination? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I have to note that the nominator confirmed on my talk page that this is indeed their first nomination, so no QPQ is required. However, the other issues remain, as brought up on my talk page. Pinging B3251 to respond here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:39, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

This is my second nomination; my first one has been accepted and is currently in the prep area. However, I’ll see if I can fix some issues or do something else soon. Repinging Narutolovehinata5. B3251 (talk) 10:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Issues have remained unaddressed so I can't approve this while those are not yet sorted out. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:41, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

• Issues have remained undressed since the nomination, and the nominator has not addressed the concerns despite the review and talk page notifications both on my page and theirs. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:55, 28 August 2023 (UTC)