Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Bully Hill Vineyards 150

< Template:Did you know nominations
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 Edge3 (talk) 17:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Bully Hill Vineyards 150

(
)

Created by ZappaOMatic (talk). Nominated by The Bushranger (talk) at 01:58, 14 January 2021 (UTC).

  • The article and hook are fine, but the nomination unfortunately came too late. The article was created on 2 January and the nomination on 14 January, which is beyond the allowed period of seven days. I'm sorry, but despite the good work it's not eligible for DYK. Ffranc (talk) 12:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @Ffranc: Please see supplimentary rule D9? The "seven days old" limit should be strictly enforced only if there is a large backlog of hooks. Otherwise nominated article may still be approved if it were created or expanded after the oldest date listed in Template talk:Did you know#Older nominations. - The Bushranger One ping only 16:59, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
  • I'll leave the decision to the person who closes the nomination then. I've looked at the article and everything in it looks good. The hook is short, interesting, supported by the article, cited etc. The only problem is that the nomination should have come a week earlier. If that's OK, then it should be promoted. Otherwise it should be rejected. Ffranc (talk) 10:35, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Coming here merely to comment and not to approve/reject the nomination, but in practice D9 is almost never invoked these days anymore, except for hours-to-one day misses or nominations by new editors (and even then it's usually cited to IAR and not D9). As long as the article has no other issues there is nevertheless still a chance that the nomination will be allowed (more likely under IAR as opposed to D9 specifically), but given that editors on WT:DYK tend to act as if DYK is perpetually backlogged I'm not really sure what to do here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:28, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
  • With 222 nominations, D9 doesn't fit; there is a large backlog of hooks at the moment. Five days late (and no chance at a 5x expansion) is more likely to get IAR if it's a new nominator, though it's been since early 2018 since The Bushranger last nominated here, so IAR may be appropriate. I'll let the eventual reviewer decide. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:11, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
  • I guess things changed over time; when I was DYKing regularly some years back the general standard was "as long as it's more recent than the oldest unreviewed hooks in the queue, it's A-OK". - The Bushranger One ping only 20:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
One possible way to get around the nomination date issues would be to bring the article to GA status and treat the article as a newly-promoted GA if/when that happens. @The Bushranger: Do you think you will be able to bring the article to GA status within a reasonable timeframe? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:38, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Alas, the answer to that with the brain-space I have available is 'almost certainly not'.Actually, having looked at the article, it's not that far off I think, so...I may take a stab at this. - The Bushranger One ping only 17:57, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Nominated. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:23, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I think we should put the nomination on hold at least until the GA review has been accomplished. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:50, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Naruto asked me to take a look at the GAN, which I will do - to avoid this being open indefinately. Might I suggest the hook is a bit weak? The first Canadian winner is a "so what?" Situation to me. There is a bit about the winner having nearly not had a garage booked due to being a late selection which is much better in my eyes. Of course this does all ride on the GAN passing. Specifically this bit "he did so in his third career start and for a team that did not reserve a garage space as the entry had been hastily arranged" - Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:22, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@Ffranc: Will you be able to give this a second review? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:25, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
  • OK, this should count as new enough, because it can either be said to have been nominated immediately after or more than a month before becoming a GA. The article is long enough obviously, it looks neutral, everything is cited and I've found no copyright issues. I think the original hook is OK, but ALT1 adds some drama and stays within 200 characters. Both hooks are properly cited in the article. QPQ was done last month. With the original issue solved by bringing the article to GA, it should be good to go. Ffranc (talk) 13:15, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Bully_Hill_Vineyards_150&oldid=1008119646"