- 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 23:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Vadym Sukharevsky
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Daleks' Master Plan
- Comment: I have asked on the Ukrainian article for a better cite for the family info. As a native English speaker I cleaned up this translation from the Ukrainian article but please let me know if anything else is needed.
Created by
Chidgk1 (
talk).
Number of QPQs required:
1. Nominator has 38 past nominations.
Chidgk1 (talk) 13:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC).
- I don't think this counts as a full review, but this nomination will not pass. The article is full of WP:PROSELINE, which is highly discouraged. The information about his family is inherently unverifiable to anyone who isn't you. How would readers check sources? I want to see this nomination go through, but that won't be possible without restructuring the article to remove the proseline and the family information. Bremps... 04:50, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Chidgk1: Please address the above.--Launchballer 18:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for slow reply - have been up in hills for a week and just got back a couple of hours ago. Have asked on talk page of Ukrainian article if they can find a better cite for the family details than the long video which is there now. Will fix proseline. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Have made some changes - hope someone can now review this. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
It won't be me for a while as I review oldest first. I would suggest taking the ref out of the infobox and expanding/moving the Family single-sentence WP:PARAGRAPH, although these aren't DYK issues. Full review needed.--Launchballer 09:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for quick reply but I don’t understand why it is wrong to have a ref in an infobox. Re expanding I will leave it for a little while in the hope someone else might expand, but feel free to press me if they have not done so in a reasonable time. Chidgk1 (talk) 09:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- The relevant policy is MOS:INFOBOXREF, which I'm surprised to find says that they're acceptable in some cases. I would argue that both of the facts should be included in the main body.--Launchballer 09:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- OK thanks done Chidgk1 (talk) 15:11, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Full review needed. (You can reinstate his birthdate when you have a source for it.)--Launchballer 19:29, 4 August 2024 (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:
The
Unmanned Systems Forces seems to be a Ukranian unit, so the "in the world" is largely unneeded (but not a DYK issue). And I can't promote it because it not nominated, but
File:Вадим Сухаревський cropped.jpg would seem to be a valid photo; it's used, with a free license and clear at small size
Cambalachero (
talk) 19:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)
The Unmanned Systems Forces seems to be a Ukranian unit, so the "in the world" is largely unneeded (but not a DYK issue). And I can't promote it because it not nominated, but File:Вадим Сухаревський cropped.jpg would seem to be a valid photo; it's used, with a free license and clear at small size Cambalachero (talk) 19:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)