Template:Did you know nominations/Star Warped
- 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 MPJ-DK 00:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Star Warped
[edit]- ... that PC Gamer negatively compared video game parody Star Warped to the Star Wars Holiday Special?
Created/expanded by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:24, 12 September 2016 (UTC).
- The Star Wars Holiday Special is notorious for being awful, so I think this tag will be very interesting to our readers.--Coin945 (talk) 07:25, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
@Coin945: Date and expansion fine. Hook is OK. However there are a number of tags in the article which would need to be addressed and removed before I can pass this. A QPQ is also needed. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- I can't see any tags in the article. Maybe I'm missing something. Please can you elaborate? Also I'll get on the QPQ asap.--Coin945 (talk) 09:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- The citation needed tag in the intro for example. The Royal C (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Fixed. That was a remnant of an old version of the article. The info was properly sourced, but the tag remained. It's gone now.--Coin945 (talk) 03:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
@Coin945: Excellent. QPQ done, no close para. Now I can approve this. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
DYK cannot be a Stub. This is classified as a Stub. It doesn't quite meet expansion, either. The last date before expansion began was February 26, 2016, at which it was 1156 characters (0 words) "readable prose size". 1156 X 5 = 5780. Currently, the article is at 5222. You need to expand it before this can pass DYK. — Maile (talk) 20:17, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
- The article is clearly no longer a stub, and it can easily be reclassified, which I will do now (This is a silly point to raise). I am not sure where you are getting your readible prose size figures, but from my calculation the article has been expanded from 2,108 bytes to 12,313 bytes. A 5.84 times expansion.--Coin945 (talk) 02:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- Confirming that this is no longer a stub. It's not a silly point, it's part of the WP:DYKR Reviewing guidelines:
In addition to at least 1,500 characters of readable prose, the article must not be a stub. This requires a judgement call, since there is no mechanical stub definition (see the Croughton-London rule). If an article is, in fact, a stub, you should temporarily reject the nomination; if the article is not a stub, ensure that it is correctly marked as a non-stub, by removing any stub template(s) in the article, and changing any talk-page assessments to start-class or higher.
- Confirming that this is no longer a stub. It's not a silly point, it's part of the WP:DYKR Reviewing guidelines:
- As for size, DYKcheck in the tool in the upper right of this nomination template, and is loaded in my left-hand Toolbox sidebar. DYK does not use bytes to calculate expansion; for one thing, that would include things like piping and other formatting. DYK uses "characters of readable prose". For future reference, if you like, you can easily add the DYKcheck to your Toolbox. Just add its script from the above link to your commons.js Then pull up any article and click on the DYK check link in your Toolbox. Voila! - you will see its calculation at the top of the page. — Maile (talk) 14:40, 17 September 2016 (UTC)