Template:Did you know nominations/Cam Newton (safety)
- The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 00:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Cam Newton (safety)
edit- ... that Cam Newton was cut by the Carolina Panthers?
- Reviewed: Der Geist hilft unser Schwachheit auf, BWV 226
- Comment: Would like it if this was put into the 16-24 slot. Most American football fans would be wide awake during that window.
- Comment: Reviewers who do not follow American football should note that these four hooks are supposed to make the reader believe they are about the more well-known Cameron Jerrell Newton, who plays for the Panthers. Buggie111 (talk) 17:47, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Created/expanded by Buggie111 (talk). Self nom at 04:05, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that Cam Newton went undrafted?
- ALT2: ... that Cam Newton played nine games for the Atlanta Falcons?
- ALT3: ... that Cam Newton has retired after just two seasons in the NFL?
The article is well-referenced and well-informative, even I made fixes. "Touchdown" I understand, but I linked some phrases, just in case that any average reader is not familiar with them. Also, I fixed references for you. As for hook, ALT3 is most interesting of all, as other hooks are not that intriguing, especially for non-Americans. Still, there are more interesting facts than ALT3, like the "two 'Cam Newton's" part. Nevertheless, I'll safely say that, if two Cam Newtons thing is not that interesting, ALT3 is good to go. --George Ho (talk) 06:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Almost forgot; it passes fivefold expansion requirement. No bloating this time. --George Ho (talk) 06:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Also, this version was unreferenced, so this nomination may have passed the twofold expansion for this unreferenced BLP. --George Ho (talk) 07:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
