Template:Did you know nominations/Seattle Arctic drilling protests

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) 05:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Seattle Arctic drilling protests

(

)

... that when word got out that the Shell Polar Pioneer (pictured) and other Arctic drilling vessels were coming to Seattle, the term kayaktivists was popluarized for the waterborne activists who turned out to protest?

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Aniello Desiderio

Created by Dennis Bratland (talk). Self-nominated at 21:03, 4 June 2015 (UTC).

Looks good to me. I hope this gets posted. Brian Everlasting (talk) 03:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

@Brian Everlasting: you should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been met. The nominator has more than 5 DYKs, so he should submit a QPQ. I also think the hook is too clunky and should be shortened to something like:

QPQ review Done --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:17, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
ALT1: ... that when word got out that the Shell Polar Pioneer (pictured) and other Arctic drilling vessels were coming to Seattle, hundreds of kayaktivists came out to protest? Yoninah (talk) 22:03, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. New reviewer needed. Yoninah (talk) 20:13, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

If it said "...hundreds of kayativists came out..." it would still only be 165 characters, well within limits. The visual impact[1] of all those boats was part of the reason for the press attention (still looking for a free image of that). --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Good idea. Tweaked ALT1. Yoninah (talk) 09:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Article was created on 27 May and nominated on 4 June, appears to have been 1 day out of nomination. 14:54 creation on 27th would be at 14:53 on the 3 June, if my count is correct. Don't know if a one-day exception can be granted or not, so looked at it in another way. On June 2, it was 5132 chars 5x expansion would require 25660 chars. Not sufficient, so would still need exception. Article is 13500 chars, substantially above 1500 required for DYK and as shown above was above when nominated. Prose is neutral, sources are cited in-line and it does not appear to have close paraphrasing. Hook length is fine, is interesting, and is verified by reference #3 as cited. QPQ is noted. Photo is free image per commons citation. SusunW (talk) 19:09, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

If would need to be 25000 chars if it were nominated for 5x expansion today. Since it could a have been put in as 5x expansion instead of new on the day it was nominated, June 4, then it was expanded from 281 chars to 5132 chars in the 7 days before nomination. I just thought if I'd done that I'd be gaming the system, but on strict technicality, that's what I should have done. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:42, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I hear you and I don't know the answers to the questions. Really enjoyed reading it and except for the date issue appears to meet all criteria. Maybe @Yoninah: can help. SusunW (talk) 20:41, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I don't understand the problem. The article was created on May 27 and nominated on June 4; a one-day extension is certainly acceptable and we should accept it. There is no reason to talk about 5x expansions when this is a new article! Yoninah (talk) 20:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Great! Then based on that that a one-day extension is acceptable, article is GTG SusunW (talk) 20:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)