Talk:Yuki Sakakihara

Latest comment: 6 months ago by PrimalMustelid in topic Did you know nomination

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 PrimalMustelid talk 16:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Moved to mainspace by Miraclepine (talk). Self-nominated at 22:52, 17 March 2024 (UTC).Reply

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 42 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   Article was moved to mainspace at 19:54 on March 10 but nomimated for DYK at 22:52 on March 17. It's a little bit over the cut-off. Sourcing looks good at Earwig picked up a 0% copyright violation. There is also some trivial information, such as Sakakihara being a fan of a band that really doesn't contribute to his notability. lullabying (talk) 22:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Lullabying: Well, the within the last seven days part in WP:DYKNEW could either be interpretated as the last 168 hours or the last seven calendar days, and I submitted it while interpreting it as the latter. Considering it's only almost three hours late under the former (especially since in part I've been a bit busy with school lately) and DYKs have been approved despite being almost a day late IIRC, maybe you can reconsider the rejection with some flexibility? If not, that's fine. ミラP@Miraclepine 06:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Not everyone lives in the same time zone, so I would definitely consider 168 hours.   Can I get a second opinion before proceeding? lullabying (talk) 08:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
  This is an obvious case for AGFing, per the bit of WP:DYKNEW that says "The seven-day limit can be extended for a day or two upon request." (For transparency, I have not looked at the article myself, but if that's the only objection, then let's roll.)--Launchballer 21:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Since it qualifies, then it looks good to go. lullabying (talk) 05:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply