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) 05:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
The hook says his "budget was set" at $100, but the source says his "spending" was "limited" to $100. They are not necessarily the same thing. Gatoclass (talk) 13:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
I was trying to avoid a close paraphrase, so if you can think of a better way I’d be grateful. I disagree with your assessment: limiting someone’s spending is synonymous with setting their budget, but it’s also not something I’m going to fight over if there’s another possible way to say it. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
A budget is a set amount for a given period of time, and there is no time period mentioned in the source, it just says his spending was limited to $100. Most probably that just means he wasn't permitted to spend more than $100 on anything without getting approval. So I think "budget" is misleading and unsupported by the source. With regard to close paraphrasing, I think you only need to follow the wording of the article which says his spending was "restricted". Gatoclass (talk) 13:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
I disagree with you on this point, and think that this hook is both better than any alternatives and is in fact supported by the source. It is obviously talking about a budget, as that reading is the only one that makes sense in context. That being said, it's not worth fighting over, so I've done alt1 below. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)