- 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 Yoninah (talk) 22:17, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
R. v. Gowan
edit... that, in March 1998, the Ontario Court of Justice ruled that while being topless as form of protest and speech is legal, being topless while one engages in a commercial purpose such as prostitution is illegal?
Created/expanded by Futurist110 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC).
- I have now reviewed this DYK? nomination: Template:Did you know nominations/EMD F40PH. Futurist110 (talk) 19:16, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
- Futurist110 If you wish to claim EMD F40PH as a QPQ, please do a review that checks the DYK criteria. You mistakenly dismissed that nomination as not eligible. Articles achieving GA status have been accepted as DYK nominations since 2013. Thank you for your participation. — Maile (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
@Futurist110: Date and length fine. However the hook comes in at 209 characters, though it is supported inline. As @Maile66: said, you will need to do another review to count as a QPQ as the one used here appears to have been based on an erroneous reading of the rules which has since been overridden by another reviewer. Once those issues have been fixed, I'll have another look. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- Here's another QPQ for me: Template:Did you know nominations/Y. D. Sharma ; indeed, would that QPQ work? Futurist110 (talk) 23:15, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- That's good, however the hook is still too long at the moment. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- ALT HOOK 1: ... that, in March 1998, the Ontario Court of Justice ruled that being topless while one engages in a commercial purpose such as prostitution is illegal?
- (Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20170308001858/http://ns1.mattheij.com/CapitolHill/lobby/6107/Ontario/Ottawa/Mar0498OttCit.html )
- That's good, however the hook is still too long at the moment. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:41, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Here's another QPQ for me: Template:Did you know nominations/Y. D. Sharma ; indeed, would that QPQ work? Futurist110 (talk) 23:15, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- Futurist110 If you wish to claim EMD F40PH as a QPQ, please do a review that checks the DYK criteria. You mistakenly dismissed that nomination as not eligible. Articles achieving GA status have been accepted as DYK nominations since 2013. Thank you for your participation. — Maile (talk) 21:24, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
- What about now? Futurist110 (talk) 20:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Much better, good to go. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 23:31, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- What about now? Futurist110 (talk) 20:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
- Now at AFD so returning to prep. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Marking with proper icon for articles at AfD. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:11, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
The AfD has closed as "keep". It's been a few weeks; can someone please recheck to make sure everything is still okay with this nomination, and if so restore the tick? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:07, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- My original review stands. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 10:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
