Jump to content

Talk:Bob Scrabis (basketball)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Research

[edit]

The Scrabis name comes up 23 times on this page, which has lots of YouTube videos that might lead down a rabbit hole with content for Scrabis.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:24, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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 BorgQueen (talk14:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 19:17, 17 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bob Scrabis (basketball); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

I guess that works because Time magazine called Princeton cinderella. i will leave it up to the promotor. Just an additional note: in the future do not red x the nomination. I removed it. Bruxton (talk) 22:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:Bruxton It is better explained in the WP:IC in his article. It is more because Princeton saved the cinderella seeds from being eliminated from future tournaments. The reason I think it is better because the WP:RS is online.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:54, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Bob Scrabis (basketball)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 00:06, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Will review.  LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 00:06, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fun read! I have placed this article on hold and left my comments below.  LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 17:08, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work! Happy to pass for GA status. Congrats!  LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 01:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio check

[edit]

Earwig says good to go.

Prose

[edit]

Refs

[edit]

Passes spotcheck on refs 3, 5, 9, 15 and 19. Nice work!

Others

[edit]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.