Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Indian Model O"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>SamBlob (Reply to reviewer) |
imported>Chris857 (pass) |
||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
::Looks good to me; I have no objection to it. [[User:SamBlob|Sincerely, SamBlob]] ([[User talk:SamBlob|talk]]) 01:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC) | ::Looks good to me; I have no objection to it. [[User:SamBlob|Sincerely, SamBlob]] ([[User talk:SamBlob|talk]]) 01:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC) | ||
| − | + | :::[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] This nomination is good to go.[[User:Chris857|Chris857]] ([[User talk:Chris857|talk]]) 23:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC) | |
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | {{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | ||
Revision as of 23:51, 15 May 2013
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Indian Model O
- ... that in 1917, the year Indian discontinued its Model O flat-twin motorcycle (pictured), Harley-Davidson introduced a flat-twin motorcycle?
- Reviewed: María Jesús Alvarado Rivera
- Comment: Article created in my userspace on 6 May, moved to mainspace on 12 May.
Created by SamBlob (talk). Self nominated at 15:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC).
- New article moved from mainspace a couple days ago, 2315 chars
- QPQ done
- Images are PD
- Hook is sufficiently brief, and verified
- Article is cited inline
- Sources look sufficiently reliable. The book seems a little light on the scholarship end, but it isn't an essential source for too much of the article.
- Sources verify my spotchecks of the article, and duplication detector found no significant copying or paraphrase
- Issues/Suggestions
- For the hook, it might make it more interesting to give Indian's reason, making Harley-Davidson's decision look foolish
- ALT1 = "... that in 1917, the year Indian discontinued its Model O flat-twin motorcycle (pictured) because of poor sales, Harley-Davidson introduced a flat-twin motorcycle?" What is your opinion of this hook?
- Looks good to me; I have no objection to it. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 01:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)