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 Bruxton (talk) 17:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
... that the release of the Compaq Deskpro 386 in 1986 marked the first time a company other than IBM revised a major component of the IBM PCde facto standard? Source: Howlett, Karen (September 10, 1986). "Compaq leapfrogs IBM with 386-model machines". The Globe and Mail. Bell Globemedia Publishing: B14 – via ProQuest.
ALT1: ... that the release of the Compaq Deskpro 386 marked the first time a company other than IBM revised a major component of their PC standard? Source: Howlett, Karen (September 10, 1986). "Compaq leapfrogs IBM with 386-model machines". The Globe and Mail. Bell Globemedia Publishing: B14 – via ProQuest.
Overall: Definitely interesting! That said, DigitalIceAge, I notice you used the same hook for ALT0 and ALT1. Did you intend to nominate another hook for consideration? --Sky Harbor(talk) 15:58, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the review, @Sky Harbor:! ALT1 is slightly abridged, in case the DYK promoter needs a shorter hook. DigitalIceAge (talk) 17:51, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
I see! I would have no issue with either hook then in that case. --Sky Harbor(talk) 17:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Sky Harbor I was just going to promote this when I noticed a small issue. In the lead this information is presented Compaq continued releasing updated models of the Deskpro 386 as faster revisions of the 386 chip were introduced by Intel, until the Intel 486 processor eventually overtook sales of the 386 in the early 1990s. However that information is not supported in the body with a reference. In addition, do you think any of these images from commons can work for the article? Bruxton (talk) 16:16, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Bruxton: Thanks for the suggestions; I have added a couple of those images and added a section on later models of the line that should corroborate that sentence in the lede now (I also altered the sentence slightly to remove the i486 bit, as the two lines overlapped it turns out). DigitalIceAge (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Definitely interesting! That said, DigitalIceAge, I notice you used the same hook for ALT0 and ALT1. Did you intend to nominate another hook for consideration? --Sky Harbor (talk) 15:58, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Sky Harbor I was just going to promote this when I noticed a small issue. In the lead this information is presented 