Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/1965 Norwegian Second Division"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>SporkBot
m (Replace a deprecated template (*mp))
imported>SporkBot
m (Replace template per TFD outcome for *mp; no change in content)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=1965 Norwegian Second Division|1965 Norwegian Second Division}}
 
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=1965 Norwegian Second Division|1965 Norwegian Second Division}}
 
*... that when [[FK Kvik|Kvik]] lost 8–2 against [[IL Hødd|Hødd]] in the decisive match of the '''[[1965 Norwegian Second Division]]''', their rivals [[Rosenborg BK|Rosenborg]] lost the promotion on [[goal difference]]?
 
*... that when [[FK Kvik|Kvik]] lost 8–2 against [[IL Hødd|Hødd]] in the decisive match of the '''[[1965 Norwegian Second Division]]''', their rivals [[Rosenborg BK|Rosenborg]] lost the promotion on [[goal difference]]?
:{{*mp}} ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Frank Esposito (politician)]]
+
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Frank Esposito (politician)]]
:{{*mp}} ''Comment'': I'm open to suggestion for rewording the hook
+
:* ''Comment'': I'm open to suggestion for rewording the hook
 
<small>Moved to mainspace by [[User:Mentoz86|Mentoz86]] ([[User talk:Mentoz86|talk]]).&nbsp;Self nominated at 00:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)</small>.
 
<small>Moved to mainspace by [[User:Mentoz86|Mentoz86]] ([[User talk:Mentoz86|talk]]).&nbsp;Self nominated at 00:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)</small>.
  
 
:* [[File:Pictogram voting keep.svg|16px]]: The length, amount of sourcing, and overall quality of the article look good to me, with the one caveat that I cannot read Norwegian and thus cannot verify the references (including the hook, which I am accepting in good faith). It would probably be a good idea for a reviewer who understands Norwegian to take a look at this nomination. [[User:Michael Barera|Michael Barera]] ([[User talk:Michael Barera|talk]]) 05:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC){{#if:yes|</div></noinclude>|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template talk:Did you know/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|[[Category:Pending DYK nominations]][[Category:DYK/Nominations|Pending]]|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template:Did you know nominations/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|[[Category:DYK/Nominations|Pending]][[Category:Pending DYK nominations]]}}}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->
 
:* [[File:Pictogram voting keep.svg|16px]]: The length, amount of sourcing, and overall quality of the article look good to me, with the one caveat that I cannot read Norwegian and thus cannot verify the references (including the hook, which I am accepting in good faith). It would probably be a good idea for a reviewer who understands Norwegian to take a look at this nomination. [[User:Michael Barera|Michael Barera]] ([[User talk:Michael Barera|talk]]) 05:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC){{#if:yes|</div></noinclude>|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template talk:Did you know/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|[[Category:Pending DYK nominations]][[Category:DYK/Nominations|Pending]]|{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Template:Did you know nominations/{{SUBPAGENAME}}|[[Category:DYK/Nominations|Pending]][[Category:Pending DYK nominations]]}}}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

Revision as of 12:49, 5 March 2018

Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of 1965 Norwegian Second Division's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Carabinieri (talk) 00:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC).

1965 Norwegian Second Division

Moved to mainspace by Mentoz86 (talk). Self nominated at 00:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC).

  • Pictogram voting keep.svg: The length, amount of sourcing, and overall quality of the article look good to me, with the one caveat that I cannot read Norwegian and thus cannot verify the references (including the hook, which I am accepting in good faith). It would probably be a good idea for a reviewer who understands Norwegian to take a look at this nomination. Michael Barera (talk) 05:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC)