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 CSJJ104 (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Overall: I like the picture! Earwig's picks up the incorporate public domain text, as expected. No quality issues, as expected from a GA. My only quarrel is with the hook: Does it need the comma? I have occasionally seen it used like this before, but it looked weird to me as a non-native, and I couldn't find any reference to this usage in Comma#Uses in English. Should it not simply be dropped @Evrik? –LordPickleII (talk) 18:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
I have no objection to dropping the comma. It is a parenthetical comma, something you could replace with parentheses. If the comma is omitted, we have a false title phrase. Meh. Hawkeye7(discuss) 21:56, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
@Hawkeye7: Interesting, thanks! I missed that. In this case I have no objection to keeping it, either; may the promoter decide. –LordPickleII (talk) 09:28, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
@Hawkeye7: I'm a little concerned that the hook will direct most readers to click on Earthrise, rather than William Anders. Would you be okay with removing Earthrise's link in the hook? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:41, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
I like the picture! Earwig's picks up the incorporate public domain text, as expected. No quality issues, as expected from a GA. My only quarrel is with the hook: Does it need the comma? I have occasionally seen it used like this before, but it looked weird to me as a non-native, and I couldn't find any reference to this usage in Comma#Uses in English. Should it not simply be dropped @Evrik? –LordPickleII (talk) 18:46, 6 September 2022 (UTC)