This article was nominated for deletion on 20 February 2021. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.
A fact from Time's Arrow (short story) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
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) 06:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Overall: Note that this is a 5x expanded nomination, not a newly created one, but it easily meets the expansion threshold for DYK and so eligibility is not an issue. Note also that I could not view the Google Books preview for the source of the hook, so I am accepting it (along with a few other offline-only references) in good faith. There are a couple fairly lengthy quotations in this article, but I think that they are used sensibly and are quite useful. I would not object to trimming them down a little, but I don't think that that is necessary, either. Overall, nice work, ReaderofthePack and Piotrus! I really enjoyed reading this article and reviewing this nomination. Michael Barera (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
Hi! Just in case anyone is curious beyond this, the sentence in question that backs up the hook is "This paleontological possibility, by the way, had not been found in life before Clarke's story, but has been since." 12:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Note that this is a 5x expanded nomination, not a newly created one, but it easily meets the expansion threshold for DYK and so eligibility is not an issue. Note also that I could not view the Google Books preview for the source of the hook, so I am accepting it (along with a few other offline-only references) in good faith. There are a couple fairly lengthy quotations in this article, but I think that they are used sensibly and are quite useful. I would not object to trimming them down a little, but I don't think that that is necessary, either. Overall, nice work, ReaderofthePack and Piotrus! I really enjoyed reading this article and reviewing this nomination. Michael Barera (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)