Template:Did you know nominations/Joel Fagliano
- 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) 08:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Joel Fagliano
- ... that The New York Times puzzle editor Joel Fagliano published four crosswords in the paper before he finished high school? Source: Chestnut Hill Local "Before finishing high school, he had three more puzzles accepted by the New York Times"
Created by Sdkb (talk) and Kekki1978 (talk). Nominated by Sdkb (talk) and User:Kekki1978 (talk) at 02:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC).
- Article is new enough (moved from user space on 25 April), long enough (just barely), fully sourced, neutral and stable. Hook fact is present in article and cited to online sources. No apparent BLP issues. It just needs a QPQ. Sdkb and Kekki1978, let me know when you've done one.
MeegsC (talk) 13:02, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, Sdkb, but you are not! ;) MeegsC (talk) 16:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- MeegsC, my understanding is that if either nominator is under 5 credits, the QPQ is satisfied; Kekki1978 joined as co-nom here. I'll hopefully get around to reviewing a nom sometime soon, but unless there's been a rule change I don't think it's required. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- As you are technically the one who nominated it, my understanding of the rules (specifically
For every nomination you make you must review one other nomination
) is that a QPQ is expected. Had Kekki physically created the nomination page, or really been involved in the nomination process at all, it would be different... Eddie891 Talk Work 23:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC) - The rules state it as, "For every nomination you make you must review one other nomination ... ", which is that whoever creates the nomination template is liable for the QPQ. — Maile (talk) 10:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- As you are technically the one who nominated it, my understanding of the rules (specifically
- MeegsC, my understanding is that if either nominator is under 5 credits, the QPQ is satisfied; Kekki1978 joined as co-nom here. I'll hopefully get around to reviewing a nom sometime soon, but unless there's been a rule change I don't think it's required. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, Sdkb, but you are not! ;) MeegsC (talk) 16:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- Article is new enough (moved from user space on 25 April), long enough (just barely), fully sourced, neutral and stable. Hook fact is present in article and cited to online sources. No apparent BLP issues. It just needs a QPQ. Sdkb and Kekki1978, let me know when you've done one.
