Template:Did you know nominations/Pickett-Hamilton fort
Appearance
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:40, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Pickett-Hamilton fort
[edit]- ... that the Pickett-Hamilton fort could pop up at any time?
Created by Gaius Cornelius (talk). Self-nominated at 14:19, 10 April 2017 (UTC).
- This is a new article having been moved to the main space today. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 14:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - Gaius Cornelius, Pickett-Hamilton Fort (Fort as uppercase) already existed as a redirect to British_hardened_field_defences_of_World_War_II#Pickett-Hamilton_Fort. I just changed it to redirect to your new article. It appears by the lead in your article, that this is one and the same fort. Since you're an admin, did you want to move your article over the redirect? Whatever you do, do not move this DYK template to another name. The template is fine as it is; you could just adjust the link in the hook. BTW, awesome image, even more awesome in the article. I love it. — Maile (talk) 15:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
- Maile66, that's great - thanks for your help. I am a little preoccupied with the inconsistent view of the .gif file. I sometimes see black bars on the left and right, but not always. Any suggestions to improve this would be very welcome. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 08:11, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, the .gif image seems to be reliable in IE, but not when viewed with Chrome. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 11:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- Answering my own questions: flushing my temporary files did the trick. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 11:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- Other problems:
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Invalid status "m" - use one of "y", "?", "maybe", "no" or "again"
- I have reviewed Mississippi River and Bonne Terre Railway. QPQ. Unsigned reply by Gaius Cornelius at 19:41 on 12 April 2017.
- Thanks for reporting about your QPQ. Thus this article is ready to go, indeed. NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:12, 12 April 2017 (UTC)