Template:Did you know nominations/Montgomery Brawl
- 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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 17:27, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Montgomery Brawl
- ... that The Fader praised "Montgomery Brawl" as "a hilarious ... song a piece of history deserves"? Source: https://www.thefader.com/2023/08/08/gmac-cash-battle-of-alabama-montgomery-brawl
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/HeadOn
Created by CJ-Moki (talk). Self-nominated at 08:40, 9 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Montgomery Brawl; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
- 1. The sentence ""Montgomery Brawl" was universally acclaimed by music critics" isn't supported by any citations. The two citations in the following sentences don't justify a universal acclamation. It might be better phrased as ""Montgomery Brawl" has been generally praised by music critics" or the like.
- 2. The hook is cited but it combines two separate quotes from the source article into one contorted quote. Could I suggest: "... that The Fader praised "Montgomery Brawl" as "a hilarious recap" of the brawl and a "song a piece of history deserves?" Hybernator (talk) 23:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Hybernator: I think your proposal is a fair alternative:
- ALT1: ... that The Fader praised "Montgomery Brawl" as "a hilarious recap" of the brawl and a "song a piece of history deserves?" Source: https://www.thefader.com/2023/08/08/gmac-cash-battle-of-alabama-montgomery-brawl
- CJ-Moki (talk) 04:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- * New enough. Long enough. Well written. Citations throughout. Hook ALT1 is interesting, and cited. QPQ done. GTG. Hybernator (talk) 04:24, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- @CJ-Moki: Could you please de-orphan the article and then remove the tag? Cielquiparle (talk) 08:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Cielquiparle: I just de-orphaned the article. CJ-Moki (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Restore tick. Cielquiparle (talk) 14:01, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Cielquiparle: I just de-orphaned the article. CJ-Moki (talk) 16:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- @CJ-Moki: Could you please de-orphan the article and then remove the tag? Cielquiparle (talk) 08:18, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- * New enough. Long enough. Well written. Citations throughout. Hook ALT1 is interesting, and cited. QPQ done. GTG. Hybernator (talk) 04:24, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Article presently has a merge banner - as of September 8. Bruxton (talk) 22:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- On hold until merge discussion closes. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)