Talk:Engine No. 1/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Engine No. 1. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Nice work on this article! You beat me to it and did a fantastic job..
Mainly 13:49, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that investment fund Engine No. 1 waged a successful proxy battle against ExxonMobil despite owning only 0.02% of the oil company's shares? Source: Engine No. 1, won a victory over one of America’s most iconic companies. Its acrimonious six-month proxy battle [...] Engine No. 1 had only a 0.02% stake... [1]
- Reviewed: Not needed, fewer than 5 DYK credits.
Created by 15 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
Good to go, nice work! Fascinating article, too. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 04:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)