Template:Did you know nominations/Typhoon Nepartak (2016)

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) 05:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Typhoon Nepartak (2016)

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

Typhoon Nepartak on July 7

• ... that a 205 km/h (127 mph) gust of wind in Taitung County, Taiwan, during Typhoon Nepartak (pictured) on July 8, 2016, is the highest recorded in the county?

• Reviewed: Guerra de Familias (2012)

Created by Hamham31 (talk), Cyclonebiskit (talk), and Meow (talk). Nominated by Cyclonebiskit (talk) at 22:05, 9 July 2016 (UTC).

• Some issues found.
  • ✓ This article is new and was created on 06:35, 05 July 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 11215 characters
  • ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
  • ✗ This article has the following issues:
    • {{Current weather event}} from July 2016
  • ✓ The probability of copyright violation is 5.7%. (confirm)
    • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
• No overall issues detected
  • ✓ The media File:Nepartak 2016-07-07 0230Z (gallery).jpg is free-use
  • ✓ The hook ALT0 is an appropriate length at 156 characters
  • ✓ Cyclonebiskit has more than 5 DYK credits. A QPQ review of Template:Did you know nominations/Guerra de Familias (2012) was performed for this nomination.

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This bot is experimental; please report any issues. This is not a substitute for a human review. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 22:43, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

• Article was newly created at the time of nomination, and meets the size requirements easily. It is fully cited, with the hook citation coming the sentence after the fact, which I'm happy to accept as it's obvious which one it is. No copy violations spotted in my spot checks, and the pesky banner the bot mentioned has since been removed. Happy for confirm the bot's findings and approve this for the font page. Miyagawa (talk) 17:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)