Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Wang Guanzhong"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Feminist (Acceptable) |
imported>Allen3 (to prep4) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | <noinclude>[[Category:Passed DYK nominations from August 2015]]<div style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |
| − | + | :''The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify this page.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|this nomination's talk page]], [[Talk:{{SUBPAGENAME}}|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 ''[[User: Allen3|Allen3]]'' <sup>[[User talk:Allen3|talk]]</sup> 21:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC)<br /> |
{{DYK conditions}} | {{DYK conditions}} | ||
====Wang Guanzhong==== | ====Wang Guanzhong==== | ||
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=Wang Guanzhong|Wang Guanzhong}} | {{DYK nompage links|nompage=Wang Guanzhong|Wang Guanzhong}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
* ... that at the 2014 [[Shangri-La Dialogue]], Chinese general '''[[Wang Guanzhong]]''' accused [[Shinzo Abe]] and [[Chuck Hagel]] of provocation, in response to their criticism of China's actions in the [[South China Sea]]? | * ... that at the 2014 [[Shangri-La Dialogue]], Chinese general '''[[Wang Guanzhong]]''' accused [[Shinzo Abe]] and [[Chuck Hagel]] of provocation, in response to their criticism of China's actions in the [[South China Sea]]? | ||
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Province of Pavia|Province of Pavia]] | :* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Province of Pavia|Province of Pavia]] | ||
<small>Created by [[User:Zanhe|Zanhe]] ([[User talk:Zanhe|talk]]). Self-nominated at 00:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC).</small> | <small>Created by [[User:Zanhe|Zanhe]] ([[User talk:Zanhe|talk]]). Self-nominated at 00:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC).</small> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
:* [[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Hook is uninteresting and has neutrality concerns. <span style="color:black">[[User:Sovereign Sentinel|sovereign]]°[[User talk:Sovereign Sentinel|sentinel]] [[Special:Contributions/Sovereign Sentinel|(contribs)]]</span> 07:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC) | :* [[File:Symbol possible vote.svg|16px]] Hook is uninteresting and has neutrality concerns. <span style="color:black">[[User:Sovereign Sentinel|sovereign]]°[[User talk:Sovereign Sentinel|sentinel]] [[Special:Contributions/Sovereign Sentinel|(contribs)]]</span> 07:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
::* {{re|Sovereign Sentinel}} Could you elaborate on the "neutrality concerns?" The hook presents the positions of both sides in a balanced manner, and is basically a paraphrase of the lead of [http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-general-abe-hagel-speeches-provocative-toward-china-1401590684 this WSJ article]. How is it non-neutral? As for interestingness, this trade of barbs was interesting enough to make headlines worldwide last year, just search Google news. -[[User:Zanhe|Zanhe]] ([[User talk:Zanhe|talk]]) 19:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC) | ::* {{re|Sovereign Sentinel}} Could you elaborate on the "neutrality concerns?" The hook presents the positions of both sides in a balanced manner, and is basically a paraphrase of the lead of [http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-general-abe-hagel-speeches-provocative-toward-china-1401590684 this WSJ article]. How is it non-neutral? As for interestingness, this trade of barbs was interesting enough to make headlines worldwide last year, just search Google news. -[[User:Zanhe|Zanhe]] ([[User talk:Zanhe|talk]]) 19:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC) | ||
| − | :::*[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Sorry, I got mixed up while reviewing... Otherwise the article is long enough, new enough, and adequately sourced. Apologies for the inconvenience <span style="color:black">[[User:Sovereign Sentinel|sovereign]]°[[User talk:Sovereign Sentinel|sentinel]] [[Special:Contributions/Sovereign Sentinel|(contribs)]]</span> 23:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC) | + | :::*[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Sorry, I got mixed up while reviewing... Otherwise the article is long enough, new enough, and adequately sourced. Apologies for the inconvenience <span style="color:black">[[User:Sovereign Sentinel|sovereign]]°[[User talk:Sovereign Sentinel|sentinel]] [[Special:Contributions/Sovereign Sentinel|(contribs)]]</span> 23:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)</div></noinclude><!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
| − | |||
| − | |||
Revision as of 21:04, 8 September 2015
- 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 Allen3 talk 21:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Wang Guanzhong
- ... that at the 2014 Shangri-La Dialogue, Chinese general Wang Guanzhong accused Shinzo Abe and Chuck Hagel of provocation, in response to their criticism of China's actions in the South China Sea?
- Reviewed: Province of Pavia
Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 00:11, 23 August 2015 (UTC).
Hook is uninteresting and has neutrality concerns. sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 07:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
- Template:Re Could you elaborate on the "neutrality concerns?" The hook presents the positions of both sides in a balanced manner, and is basically a paraphrase of the lead of this WSJ article. How is it non-neutral? As for interestingness, this trade of barbs was interesting enough to make headlines worldwide last year, just search Google news. -Zanhe (talk) 19:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I got mixed up while reviewing... Otherwise the article is long enough, new enough, and adequately sourced. Apologies for the inconvenience sovereign°sentinel (contribs) 23:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)