Talk:623rd Field Artillery Regiment

Did you know nomination

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 SL93 (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the special designation of the 623rd Field Artillery Regiment is being reviewed as it refers to Confederate general John Hunt Morgan? Source: "The Morgan’s Men designation and other items with potential links to the Confederacy, such as patches and call signs, are under review, said Lt. Col. Stephen Martin, a spokesman for the Kentucky National Guard. Part of the review will determine whether the unit should request to change Morgan’s Men and potential candidates to replace it, Martin said." from: Horton, Alex (11 March 2021). "Army continues to honor Confederate unit histories, even as base names draw scrutiny". Washington Post. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  • ALT1: ... that the 623rd Field Artillery Regiment is one of a handful of American military units whose special designations refer to their Confederate States Army lineage? Source: "At least three units have official nicknames that honor their Confederate roots, according to a count by the Army provided to The Washington Post. One of them, a unit in Virginia, is called “Stonewall Brigade” after Confederate Gen. Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson. At least three others have names tied to the Confederacy in other ways, the Army said." from: Horton, Alex (11 March 2021). "Army continues to honor Confederate unit histories, even as base names draw scrutiny". Washington Post. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Lettuce club
  • Comment: I have not found any report of the review, started in March 2021, yet concluding

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 11:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Looks good. I wasn't aware what a special designation was before and once I knew what it means the hook made a lot more sense. I like the second hook more as it's easier to understand without knowing what a special designation is. Moved from user page on 17 January, almost 8,000 characters, well sourced, no obvious plagiarism, hook is verified. Eóin (talk) 21:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)