Template:Did you know nominations/False statements of fact

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:22, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

False statements of fact

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the United States Supreme Court once said that "there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact"?

• Reviewed: Eccentric flint (archaeology)

Created/expanded by Lord Roem (talk). Self nom at 02:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

• on sources citing court rulings. Image has fair use rationale. Size checks: " 8525 characters (1371 words) "readable prose size"" Article reads as neutral to me. (GA review is happening and suggests could be more neutral with more sources. Not familiar enough with law to validate that opinion either way.) It has inline citations. Hook is supported by source and appears interesting. Hook formatting checks out. Good to go.--LauraHale (talk) 20:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

• Not good to go now. Article has been renamed Defamation and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Hook may need to be reworked to reflect the name change. --LauraHale (talk) 22:24, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

• • ; I think the article naming issue has resolved itself. It is now back at its original title. :-) Lord Roem (talk) 02:01, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

• Name issue appears to be resolved. --LauraHale (talk) 02:03, 12 January 2012 (UTC)