Template:Did you know nominations/Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc.
- 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 08:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc.
edit- ... that in Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc., a United States district court is currently deciding whether or not it is legal to buy and sell pre-owned digital music?
Created/expanded by Plauph (talk). Nominated by Arctixfox (talk) at 05:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- Article new, created on 10/17. Long enough; almost 3,000 characters.
- Doesn't violate WP:BALL, but I wonder if there should be a current events template added to it, since the decision is still pending. Other than that, it's very neutral, only-the-facts-ma'am kind of article. Cursory look at sources is good.
- Interesting, short, and well-written hook.
- Should be good to go. Make sure that if a decision is handed down before this article appears on the main page, that you update it. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:04, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
You may well be right, but you may be wrong. Best to inquire on her talk page to see if that's what she meant: waiting an extra day or two never hurts to make sure we aren't promoting a not-quite-ready nomination, especially since you have not checked the article yourself. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
George would be right. It's been a while since I've reviewed a DKY, and I wasn't thoughtful enough to look for changes. My apologies for the oversight, and thanks for the note on my talk page. I love it when we're all AGFing and helping each other out. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:34, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tick. It's absolutely no problem: glad it was just changes in procedure over time. (I'm new enough that for me the icons have always been there. :-) ) The funny thing is that I'd made another ping at around the same time on another talk page, also checking on the lack of an icon: in that case, the reviewer hadn't been able to finish close paraphrasing checks because of computer issues, and was holding off on the icon until those could be completed. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)