Template:Did you know nominations/Operation Quartz

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) 05:34, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Operation Quartz edit

Created by LavaBaron (talk). Self-nominated at 02:30, 12 July 2016 (UTC).

  • Long enough, new enough, literary ref content not available online but taken IGF, hook OK and mentioned in article and cited, neutrality OK, QPQ done. "Factually dubious information" should be replaced by "dubious information" because "dubious" already implies "factually". This is an effective hook because you have to read the article to find out that the plan was never executed due to subsequent events - although the very thought of an assassination plan remains shocking, so the effect of the hook is not lessened. Storye book (talk) 08:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you, LavaBaron, for resolving the issue above. Good to go. Storye book (talk) 16:06, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Second full review required per abovementioned ANI decision. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:24, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
  • The article is new enough and long enough (1747 chars). Hook is interesting and cited to an offline source. Neutral. Double QPQ present as required in ANI. I think this is good to go. Raymie (tc) 20:59, 14 July 2016 (UTC)