Talk:Pub test

Did you know nomination

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 Cielquiparle (talk) 21:24, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Australian politicians may face the pub test? Source: ABC News
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Women Philosophers in the Long Nineteenth Century

Created by Teratix (talk). Self-nominated at 02:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Pub test; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• General eligibility:
• New enough:
• Long enough: - ?

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: The article is new enough and well sourced, but its just a bit stubby. Can you add some section headers and build it out a little? It's just over the minimum wordcount so that's OK. The hook is definitely interesting and Earwig didn't flag any copyvio. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:56, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, I'll see what I can do. – Teratix ₵ 00:48, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Teratix: have you had a chance to take a crack at this yet? BuySomeApples (talk) 04:45, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello BuySomeApples, apologies for the delay. I don't think I'm going to get around to expanding this article, so I'll withdraw this nomination. – Teratix ₵ 03:11, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Teratix: Are you sure you want to withdraw this? To me the article still feels relatively comprehensive for an obscure topic, and while the lack of sectioning is rather unusual, it's not necessarily prohibited on DYK if sections aren't necessary. Courtesy ping BuySomeApples. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

If the consensus turns out to be the article is long enough in its current state, then sure, promote it. I just don't see myself doing any expansion. – Teratix ₵ 13:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Teratix: Let's not be too hasty! This is a good nom. @Narutolovehinata5: Would you give the nom a once-over once I'm done editing it? I'll just be making minor expansions and tweaking some stuff to more closely match the sources. BuySomeApples (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

OK, I made some tweaks and it should be ready. BuySomeApples (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Not seeing any issues on my end and the hook is mentioned in the article and cited with a reference (source is paywalled, but the title basically supports the hook so that's enough for me). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Nice! BuySomeApples (talk) 22:50, 26 August 2023 (UTC)