Template:Did you know nominations/Custom House, Poole
- 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) 06:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Custom House, Poole
[edit]- ... that in 1747, the Custom House in Poole was raided by 30 smugglers from the Hawkhurst Gang?
- ALT1:... that the original Custom House in Poole was destroyed by fire?
- Reviewed: Wash's Restaurant
Created by Joseph2302 (talk). Self-nominated at 15:07, 4 September 2016 (UTC).
• 
No issues found with article, ready for human review.
- ✓ This article is new and was created on 10:01, 04 September 2016 (UTC)
- ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 1705 characters
- ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
- ✓ This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
- ✓ A copyright violation is unlikely according to automated metrics (2.0% confidence; 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 hook ALT0 is an appropriate length at 87 characters
- ✓ The hook ALT1 is an appropriate length at 58 characters
- ✓ Joseph2302 has more than 5 DYK credits. A QPQ review of Template:Did you know nominations/Wash's Restaurant was performed for this nomination.
Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This is not a substitute for a human review. Please report any issues with the bot. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 15:23, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
New enough. Long enough. QPQ done. Earwig and spot checking with dup detector found no close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations or plagiarism. All paras cited. Both hooks are good (I prefer the first one), and both check out with the cited sources. NPOV. No issues; good to go. Edwardx (talk) 18:35, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
