- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
logging camp
- ... that men working at a logging camp could work upwards of twelve hours, and consume between 6,000 to 9,000 calories, a day? [1]
- ALT1:... that logging camps were placed next to a river so that the logs harvested could be floated to the lumbermills in the Spring? [2]
Created by Evrik (talk). Self-nominated at 02:31, 23 January 2021 (UTC).
- Reviewing...new enough, long enough, no copyvio issues, reads well, hook in article and followed by inline citation to references with hook facts. Image in public domain. Will complete shortly. Whispyhistory (talk) 13:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
... QPQ done, a few references behind paywall. I prefer proposed hook. One disambiguation link to fix if possible. Thank you for an interesting enjoyable read. Whispyhistory (talk) 13:22, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Whispyhistory: What do you think of this double hook:
- ALT2:... that a cookhouse at a logging camp served up to five meals a day for the workers who could work upwards of twelve hours, and consume between 6,000 to 9,000 calories, a day? --evrik (talk) 05:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Whispyhistory: What do you think of this double hook:
@Whispyhistory and Evrik: I see that the cookhouse review is still in progress, so I'm putting this nomination on hold for now. Feel free to restore the tick when you're ready. Edge3 (talk) 01:59, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
- Image ok. If the length of ALT2 can be shortened then should be ok. Whispyhistory (talk) 06:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)