- 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 Jolly Ω Janner 00:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Episode 7202
edit... that "Episode 7202" is the first three-hander episode of the Australian soap opera Neighbours?
- Reviewed: Floriana Lines
- Comment: Please feel free to tweak the hook, or suggest another.
Moved to mainspace by JuneGloom07 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:44, 5 December 2015 (UTC).
- New? yes - at the time of nomination yes.
- Long enough? yes.
- Within policy? Yes - the entire "Plot" section is unsourced but as it was pointed out to me (thanks time. BlueMoonset) that is acceptable under the DYK guidelinbes. Everything else looks okay source wise. There were no copyvios as far as I can see, the quote was the only thing that really showed up, which is expected. Neutrality looks okay to me, I don't see any other issues as far as I can tell.
- Hook? yes Cited, the hook is fine with me
- Other? yes - QPQ review done — Preceding unsigned comment added by MPJ-DK (talk • contribs) 02:02, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Per the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Prep 1, I've pulled the nomination from prep as there are concerns about the hook. In return, I can offer
- ALT1 ... that the scene in Neighbours Episode 7202 where Terese Willis pushed Lauren Turner into the pool could only be shot once? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:54, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'm wondering why this was promoted with an unsigned review that had a ? icon as a caveat. Note to MPJ-DK: please only use one summary icon per review; it's confusing to have multiple icons, as was certainly the case here, and the software assumes the final icon on the page holds sway, which should not have been the case here. Also for future reference, plot sections generally don't need to be sourced, since the work itself is supposed to automatically reference the basic plot. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:49, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- hmm i based it on other reviews i have seen, did not realize that was problematic. And yes i forgot to sign like a doufus. MPJ-US 23:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
- MPJ-DK, are you planning to continue the review? The new ALT1 hook needs to be checked. Thanks. Also, your "policy" section doesn't mention whether you checked for close paraphrasing or neutrality. If you haven't done those checks yet, now's the time. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: I had not seen it be kicked to the side. I believe I checked using all the appropriate tools, but i am double checking now. Cannot promote until the plot section has sources even if no other issues are detected. MPJ-US 17:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)