Template:Did you know nominations/De wederopstanding van een klootzak

Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of De wederopstanding van een klootzak's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC).

De wederopstanding van een klootzak

edit
  • Reviewed: I reviewed Red Zloty, one of Piotrus's articles--can't be far removed from this one, up or down.
  • Comment: Feel free to include the translation; FWIW, the literal translation of klootzak is "scrotum". :)

Created/expanded by Drmies (talk). Self nominated at 04:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC).

  • Article - created new on 14 March, so new enough; 2810 characters of readable prose, so long enough; neutral; at least one inline citation to every paragraph except plot, which is permissible; no copy vios detected using earwig/duplication detector; assessed as start class.
  • Hook - within length criteria at 122 characters; correctly formatted; correctly cited/supported by ref #4 in 'Background' section; and takes attention as curiosity has you trying to work out what it means.
  • QPQ to be done; no image.
  • Will be okay to go as AGF on rough Google translation once QPQ is done (I'll now go and practise the 'naughty' Dutch words this review has taught me) SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
QPQ done, looks fine to go. SagaciousPhil - Chat 19:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)