Template:Did you know nominations/No net loss environmental policy
- 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 SL93 talk 23:08, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
No net loss environmental policy
- ... that at least 69 countries have no net loss environmental policies?
- Reviewed:
Created by Manxshearwater (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.
Manxshearwater (talk) 14:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC).
- @Manxshearwater: Not a review, but the hook says "more than 69" and the article says "at least 69", and these are not the same thing.--Launchballer 16:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Starting review. RoySmith (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Article is new enough and long enough.
- Looks to be appropriately sourced.
- QPQ exempt.
- Earwig doesn't show any copyvio problems.
I can't get to the full source to resolve the "at least 69" vs "more than 69" issue pointed out by Launchballer, but this needs to get sorted before this can be promoted, so giving this a query. Other than that, everything is good. I'm not excited about the interestingness of the hook, but it's not bad enough to hold up approval. RoySmith (talk) 19:33, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for bringing this to my attention @RoySmith @chba, I have changed it accordingly! Manxshearwater (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I'll AGF that this actually matches the source. BTW, for future reference, it's generally better to strike out an incorrect hook and add an alternate below it instead of editing it in-line. That just makes the history easier to follow. But no worries, you're good for this nomination.
