- 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 Bruxton talk 17:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Artists4Ceasefire
Created by John Cummings (talk). Self-nominated at 10:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Artists4Ceasefire; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
| 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: 
Article is new enough, long enough, and is well-sourced. Earwig picks up some text, but that is a mirror from WP. No QPQ required as this is the nominator's 5th DYK. I tagged a [who?] in the text as I think it would be really good to clarify specifics there. I paused on neutrality, as I wondered if there was any commentary on opposition to the open letter than was reported on (in reputable sources) - if so, that would be a good inclusion for balance. I also found this source which states the collective began on 20 October, so that would also be good detail to include. Lajmmoore (talk) 21:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you Lajmmoore for reviewing it, I've added the date in. Just a note for anyone interested, there's a discussion on the talk page about opposition to the group in general, the only thing I can find is a conspiracy theory which was promoted by the Israeli government Twitter account that the badges are secretly celebrating the killing of Israeli soldiers, Snopes debunked it and I've included this debunking in the article. Also I'm wondering if its possible to add some kind of restriction to the page for the date it is in DYK as I think it could be a target for vandalism by IP addresses. John Cummings (talk) 10:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks @John Cummings: for addressing the points above. Looks good to me. Could the prepper ping us when it's in a DYK queue, so that it could be semi-protected for when it features? Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 07:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
- The article is covered by
WP:ARBECR applies. If the page is protected I guess extended confirmed protection is the appropriate protection level.
Sean.hoyland (
talk
Article is new enough, long enough, and is well-sourced. Earwig picks up some text, but that is a mirror from WP. No QPQ required as this is the nominator's 5th DYK. I tagged a [who?] in the text as I think it would be really good to clarify specifics there. I paused on neutrality, as I wondered if there was any commentary on opposition to the open letter than was reported on (in reputable sources) - if so, that would be a good inclusion for balance. I also found this source which states the collective began on 20 October, so that would also be good detail to include. Lajmmoore (talk) 21:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)