Template:Did you know nominations/Newell Boathouse (Harvard University)
< Template:Did you know nominations
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Revision as of 14:21, 10 October 2016 by imported>EEng (Thx)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Newell Boathouse (Harvard University)
- ... that Harvard University's Newell Boathouse stands on land for which Harvard pays $1 per year under a lease lasting one thousand years
- REDIRECT Template:Zero width joiner em dash zero width non joinerafter which Harvard can renew for another thousand years? Source: "There are some incredible deals when it comes to leasing state property... The lease for Harvard’s Newall [sic] Boathouse... Harvard can rent the prime riverfront space for a dollar a year for a thousand years... In fact, it even gives Harvard an option for another 1,000 years." [1]
Created by EEng (talk). Self-nominated at 00:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC).
- Starting review. QPQ has already been used for your nomination of Template:Did you know nominations/Lionel de Jersey Harvard. Yoninah (talk) 20:30, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- How embarrassing -- I must have lost track. How do you check that, anyway? I've listed another, which I'm pretty sure hasn't been used. EEng 20:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- I looked under "What Links Here" on Template:Did you know nominations/Culley Run. The only DYK template listed there should be this one.
- Haven't you reviewed a hook since January 2015? Nowadays we'd say that the QPQ you just provided is not adequate, as it just says "GTG".
- Here's a review of your article: New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. Please provide a more detailed QPQ, and we'll be good to go. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well, as you know I've been on a bit of a DYK hiatus for a year+, so since then I've been drawing on my substantial bank of old QPQs for the occasional nom I do now and then. It may very well be that a curt report of "GTG" isn't acceptable nowadays, but it was back then so I don't see why I can't use it as a QPQ. EEng 20:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Pinging Template:Ping for guidance here. Back in January 2015, that review was accepted and promoted, even though it didn't cite policy. Yoninah (talk) 20:54, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- This better not turn out like when the government suddenly changes currency and all the old bills you have buried in coffee cans are no good any more. EEng 21:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- With a backlog of 140 or so nominations needing review, I think you might just do a new one. ;-) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:45, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- I accumulated my little piggy bank by doing a shitload of reviews the last time there was a huge backlog. I've paid my dues. EEng 06:11, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
I understand. Let me contribute one of the many reviews I've been doing lately. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 10:35, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- I accumulated my little piggy bank by doing a shitload of reviews the last time there was a huge backlog. I've paid my dues. EEng 06:11, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- With a backlog of 140 or so nominations needing review, I think you might just do a new one. ;-) Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:45, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
- This better not turn out like when the government suddenly changes currency and all the old bills you have buried in coffee cans are no good any more. EEng 21:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Well, as you know I've been on a bit of a DYK hiatus for a year+, so since then I've been drawing on my substantial bank of old QPQs for the occasional nom I do now and then. It may very well be that a curt report of "GTG" isn't acceptable nowadays, but it was back then so I don't see why I can't use it as a QPQ. EEng 20:52, 6 October 2016 (UTC)