- 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 Vaticidalprophet (talk) 11:30, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Scaring the Hoes
Improved to Good Article status by ULPS (talk). Self-nominated at 19:43, 15 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Scaring the Hoes; 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:
Promoted to GA within the last week, substantial size (975 words), balances reception with neutrality, no copyvios flagged. Hook is clever, cited, interesting and present in the article. QPQ not needed as this is the nominator
has no DYK credits. I think this is good to go, I have no preference over hooks, although the capitalisation of ALT1 might make it less wacky (which could be a good or bad thing depending on your opinion).
Schminnte (talk • contribs) 14:55, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Promoted to GA within the last week, substantial size (975 words), balances reception with neutrality, no copyvios flagged. Hook is clever, cited, interesting and present in the article. QPQ not needed as this is the nominator has no DYK credits. I think this is good to go, I have no preference over hooks, although the capitalisation of ALT1 might make it less wacky (which could be a good or bad thing depending on your opinion). Schminnte (talk • contribs) 14:55, 18 August 2023 (UTC)