Talk:Failed at Math(s)
Add topicLatest comment: 1 year ago by SL93 in topic Did you know nomination
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Failed at Math(s) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 February 2025 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Did you know nomination
[edit]- 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 SL93 talk 17:18, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
( )
Panchiko playing live on the Failed at Math(s) tour
- ... that Panchiko released their first studio album, Failed at Math(s), over 20 years after the band's formation?
- Source: UK dreampop cult group Panchiko have shared the ethereal title track from Failed at Math(s), their first new album in 20 years. https://www.brooklynvegan.com/panchiko-share-1st-new-single-in-20-years-add-more-us-tour-dates/
- ALT1: ... that Failed at Math(s) marked Panchiko's first new material in over 20 years? Source: Panchiko’s sophomore record, “Failed At Math(s),” is slated to be released on May 5, but it took over 20 years after their first album to start making music again. https://www.emorywheel.com/article/2023/05/failed-at-maths-continues-panchikos-lo-fi-legacy-two-decades-after-their-debut
- Reviewed:
- Comment: While some publications refer to this as their second album, it is actually their first, as their debut D>E>A>T>H>M>E>T>A>L is an EP.
Created by Beachweak (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
Beachweak (talk) 14:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
Overall a very nice article and very nice hook! 🙂 The article is well sourced, cited, neutral, etc., While not a condition for DYK, I would recommend rephrasing a lot of the quotes used in the Composition section in your own words, as its kind of a clunky read right now, and I feel like a lot of those exact quotes don't add much to the page. Thank you for making the page, cheers! Johnson524 08:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for accepting my nomination and thank you for the feedback! I've went and updated the Composition section to re-write a ton of the quotes in my own words and hopefully de-clunkify a lot of the article. Let me know what you think. Beachweak (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
- Look's a lot better now, thanks for making those changes! 🙂 Johnson524 06:36, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for accepting my nomination and thank you for the feedback! I've went and updated the Composition section to re-write a ton of the quotes in my own words and hopefully de-clunkify a lot of the article. Let me know what you think. Beachweak (talk) 15:08, 7 January 2025 (UTC)