Template:Did you know nominations/Sam Gillam

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 PumpkinSky talk 01:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Sam Gillam, Alf Pugh

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

... that when goalkeeper Sam Gillam replaced Alf Pugh for Wales against Scotland on 15 April 1889, he became the first substitute in international football?

Reviewed: Harry Hems; Molde FK

Created/expanded by Daemonic Kangaroo (talk). Self nom at 08:08, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

- Alf Pugh is 1382 characters - this falls below the 1500 character minimum for inclusion in DYK. I would also request that you take a look at another hook waiting to be reviewed to satisfy our QPQ requirement :) Arctic Night 14:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Now completed QPQ review (see above). The Pugh article has been extended; hopefully I have added enough to get it above the 1500 character limit. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Arctic Night 10:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

This is a double-nom, does this mean we need two reviews instead of just one? --PFHLai (talk) 08:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I generally do. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:29, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

There is nothing explicit in the rules to say this - on the sub-page for the hook it simply says "QPQ – if the nominator has more than five DYK credits and is nominating their own article, they must review another article" - no mention of a review for each new article in the nomination. Likewise, the DYK rules say "please review another editor's nomination" - no mention of one review per new article included in the nomination. Nonetheless, I have now reviewed Molde FK as well. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

We had a fairly long discussion about this... two months ago, I think. If I remember correctly, the consensus was 1 nom = 1 QPQ. Either way, everything is fine now. Tick based off of previous review. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)