Template:Did you know nominations/Elections in Jordan

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Elections in Jordan, Jordanian general election, 2016

edit
  • Reviewed: Ioan Pușcariu and Isha Gramotsavam
  • Comment: Tweaks to the hook wording welcome. I think it would be cool for this to go on the frontpage on 20 September, as that is when the 2016 elections are taking place.

5x expanded by Chipmunkdavis (talk). Self-nominated at 15:30, 26 August 2016 (UTC).

Review of Elections in Jordan
  • No issues found with article, ready for human review.
    • This article has been expanded from 616 chars to 30509 chars since 04:02, 25 January 2015 (UTC), a 49.53-fold expansion
    • This article meets the DYK criteria at 30509 characters
    • All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
    • This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
    • ? A copyright violation is suspected by an automated tool, with 22.5% confidence. (confirm)
      • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
Review of Jordanian general election, 2016
  • No issues found with article, ready for human review.
    • This article has been expanded from 1725 chars to 10465 chars since 10:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC), a 6.07-fold expansion
    • This article meets the DYK criteria at 10465 characters
    • All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
    • This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
    • A copyright violation is unlikely according to automated metrics (7.4% confidence; confirm)
      • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
General comments

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This is not a substitute for a human review. Please report any issues with the bot. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 16:02, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: GTG, hook going online on 20 September is a good idea Makeandtoss (talk) 22:27, 1 September 2016 (UTC)