- 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 PrimalMustelid talk 10:28, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Jeʹvida
Created by Juustila (talk). Self-nominated at 14:59, 20 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jeʹvida; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
Overall: 
Sources are good. No copyright vios detected. The problem is the length of this article. It's too short for a DYK nomination. If nominator can expand the article in the next couple of days with existing or new sources, this nom would probably be a go. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, how about:
- ALT1: ... that Jeʹvida is the first feature film ever shot in the endangered Skolt Sámi language, spoken by approximately 300 people in the world? Source: https://variety.com/2023/film/news/katja-gauriloff-jevida-toronto-1235719608/amp/ Juustila (talk) 08:18, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Juustila. I'm not the reviewer, just someone passing by. I don't think they meant the length of the hook itself, but the article. It currently sits at about 1000 characters. To be eligible for DYK, the article needs to be contain least 1500 characters of text (see WP:DYKLEN). This can probably be done fairly easily by just adding a plot section. That aside, I personally prefer the first hook, but I'll leave which one to promote up to the reviewer. ArcticSeeress (talk) 10:43, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Juustila: Have you been able to expand the article? Z1720 (talk) 17:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Z1720, It seems an IP editor may have expanded the article suitably. Will check later tonight or early tomorrow (PDT) as I may not have time to do so today. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Z1720 No, I haven't had time to expand the article. But, as @CurryTime7-24: said, some IP has used that time well. —Juustila (talk) 05:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- @CurryTime7-24: According to the DYK checker, the article is now long enough. Can you conduct another review? Z1720 (talk) 14:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Z1720, Yes, I already said I was going to do so later today. :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 15:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Juustila: Article looks fine now. (Thank you, IP editor!) But ALT1 is a mouthful and half the information it discloses does not appear in the article itself. Seeing as how ALT0 was not the problem in the first place, can you please retract its strike-through? As soon as you do, I'll approve it. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- CurryTime7-24, I now removed the strike-through. — Juustila (talk) 12:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! ALT0 approved. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- n
Sources are good. No copyright vios detected. The problem is the length of this article. It's too short for a DYK nomination. If nominator can expand the article in the next couple of days with existing or new sources, this nom would probably be a go. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 01:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
