Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Mile Run (White Deer Creek)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Jakec (q) |
imported>Georgejdorner (Congratulations. You have wikilawyered your way to DYK.) |
||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
|qpq = y | |qpq = y | ||
|status = y | |status = y | ||
| − | |comments = | + | |comments = Core criteria checked per above template. Hook is questionable. Although cited in the lead, it does not appear in body of the article despite WP practice of using lead as a summary for the main text. Otherwise, GTG.[[User:Georgejdorner|Georgejdorner]] ([[User talk:Georgejdorner|talk]]) 01:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC) |
}} | }} | ||
:That is irrelevant for DYK purposes. --'''[[User:Jakec|Jakob]] ([[user talk:Jakec|talk]]) ''' <small><small>aka Jakec</small></small> 01:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC) | :That is irrelevant for DYK purposes. --'''[[User:Jakec|Jakob]] ([[user talk:Jakec|talk]]) ''' <small><small>aka Jakec</small></small> 01:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
::::: I do not demand anything during reviews. I do try to suggest improvements, in an effort to aid my fellow editors, as I assume they have pride in their work. And no, I have not yet approved this nomination. Thank you for pointing out my erroneous tick.[[User:Georgejdorner|Georgejdorner]] ([[User talk:Georgejdorner|talk]]) 02:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC) | ::::: I do not demand anything during reviews. I do try to suggest improvements, in an effort to aid my fellow editors, as I assume they have pride in their work. And no, I have not yet approved this nomination. Thank you for pointing out my erroneous tick.[[User:Georgejdorner|Georgejdorner]] ([[User talk:Georgejdorner|talk]]) 02:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::::Is this approved or not? Because I am not going to do what you say, as it won't be an improvement. --'''[[User:Jakec|Jakob]] ([[user talk:Jakec|talk]]) ''' <small><small>aka Jakec</small></small> 13:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC) | ::::::Is this approved or not? Because I am not going to do what you say, as it won't be an improvement. --'''[[User:Jakec|Jakob]] ([[user talk:Jakec|talk]]) ''' <small><small>aka Jakec</small></small> 13:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::::::: "Asserting that the technical interpretation of the policies and guidelines should override the underlying principles they express." | ||
| + | ::::::: "Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions" | ||
| + | ::::::: The above quotes come from [[WP:WL]]. They describe the viewpoint you have expressed in the above nomination. Are you sure you want to present yourself this way to your fellow editors? | ||
| + | ::::::: Lastly, you are correct that you are allowed to disregard the Manual of Style if you wish and still have an article run as a DYK. Here is your approval.[[User:Georgejdorner|Georgejdorner]] ([[User talk:Georgejdorner|talk]]) 00:17, 22 January 2016 (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 00:18, 22 January 2016
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Mile Run (White Deer Creek)
- ... that Mile Run is really almost two miles long?
Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 18:37, 16 January 2016 (UTC).
- Lua error: expandTemplate: template "y" does not exist.
- That is irrelevant for DYK purposes. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 01:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- To quote WP:LEAD: "...significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article." I made the above suggestion to help you improve your article. Why not bang out a sentence or two to improve it?Georgejdorner (talk) 01:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- The question is, why would I. This is not FAC. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 01:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, I see, it's been approved already, so I assume that was only a suggestion, not a demand. Nvm. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 02:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- I do not demand anything during reviews. I do try to suggest improvements, in an effort to aid my fellow editors, as I assume they have pride in their work. And no, I have not yet approved this nomination. Thank you for pointing out my erroneous tick.Georgejdorner (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Is this approved or not? Because I am not going to do what you say, as it won't be an improvement. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 13:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- "Asserting that the technical interpretation of the policies and guidelines should override the underlying principles they express."
- "Misinterpreting policy or relying on technicalities to justify inappropriate actions"
- The above quotes come from WP:WL. They describe the viewpoint you have expressed in the above nomination. Are you sure you want to present yourself this way to your fellow editors?
- Lastly, you are correct that you are allowed to disregard the Manual of Style if you wish and still have an article run as a DYK. Here is your approval.Georgejdorner (talk) 00:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
- Is this approved or not? Because I am not going to do what you say, as it won't be an improvement. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 13:19, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- I do not demand anything during reviews. I do try to suggest improvements, in an effort to aid my fellow editors, as I assume they have pride in their work. And no, I have not yet approved this nomination. Thank you for pointing out my erroneous tick.Georgejdorner (talk) 02:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, I see, it's been approved already, so I assume that was only a suggestion, not a demand. Nvm. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 02:00, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- The question is, why would I. This is not FAC. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 01:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
- To quote WP:LEAD: "...significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article." I made the above suggestion to help you improve your article. Why not bang out a sentence or two to improve it?Georgejdorner (talk) 01:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)