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.
Article content and adequate sourcing N There are two primary sources, but the majority of the content is sourced from elsewhere.
Hook
Interesting Y, I favour the main hook over ALT1.
Both hooks are sourced and matches article. Y
Everything looks good, happy to approve. —Panamitsu(talk)Please ping on reply 03:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
@Bananagrams00, Bogger, and Panamitsu: This article needs to beef up its sources, as it appears to be relying too heavily on campus newspapers, etc. Please look for independent reliable secondary sources per WP:RS. Cielquiparle (talk) 14:50, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
@Bogger: There are still a couple of primary sources, for example reference 2. It'd be better to completely remove these if secondary sources cover the topic. —Panamitsu(talk) 01:48, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
@Panamitsu: removed one primary source, and replaced another with a secondary source. -Bogger (talk) 14:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
@Bogger: I'm not too sure about the sources on alumni.berkely.edu as they seems to be a form of a primary source as they appear to be associated with the club and only mention the club to talk about discounts to it. I'm not familiar with the subject or policy surrounding this issue so I'm having a bit of trouble understanding. —Panamitsu(talk) 04:35, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
@Panamitsu: ok I've replaced that reference with the by-laws from the club itself. While this is a primary source, it is not an advertisement, bravado, prose, or claim. -Bogger (talk) 07:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
@Cielquiparle: Sorry for the ping but do you think this counts as adequate sourcing? I'm quite reluctant to approve it. —Panamitsu(talk) 04:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Although I hope Cielquiparle will return to approve the hook. Z1720 (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
@Panamitsu, Z1720, and Bogger: Removed Weird California as a source and added a couple more; rewrote the text in the article about the ghost stories. Think it is much better now but someone else will have to approve. Cielquiparle (talk) 02:25, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Ready for re-review by Panamitsu or another reviewer. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
I've been having difficulty this one so I'll pass it on to another reviewer. —Panamitsu(talk) 10:01, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
There are two primary sources, 
—Panamitsu (talk) Please ping on reply 03:30, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Although I hope Cielquiparle will return to approve the hook. Z1720 (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Ready for re-review by Panamitsu or another reviewer. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Z1720 (talk) 01:16, 28 October 2023 (UTC)