- 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 SL93 (talk) 07:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
No Mistakes
Improved to Good Article status by Kyle Peake (talk). Self-nominated at 16:24, 9 July 2020 (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
|
|
|
Overall: 
New article, long enough, well-referenced, no copy-vios detected, hook cited-inline / interesting, no QPQ needed as this is the nominator’s second nomination. Amazing work on the article. Great to do this review Kyle Peake. Good to go! Ashleyyoursmile! 08:22, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- Ashleyyoursmile Thanks a lot for the DYK review after I did one of your GAs not long ago, I'm very happy to know this passed after my hard work. --Kyle Peake (talk) 09:15, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
New article, long enough, well-referenced, no copy-vios detected, hook cited-inline / interesting, no QPQ needed as this is the nominator’s second nomination. Amazing work on the article. Great to do this review Kyle Peake. Good to go! Ashleyyoursmile! 08:22, 23 July 2020 (UTC)