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 Yoninah (talk) 16:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Isle of the Dead, Port Arthur, Tasmania, Australia
that one of the earliest sea level benchmarks installed in the world and a convict cemetery remain preserved today on a tiny island in Tasmania called Isle of the Dead(pictured)? ([1][2])
Created/expanded by Southpaw20 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC).
Overall: Article was expanded more than fivefold from May 15 to May 22 and nominated within seven days. Length and sourcing are adequate. Article appear neutral in tone and no plagiarism issues detected. While the Earwig tool highlights many areas, these are proper names, title and quotes which are not violations. Proposed hook is interesting, mentioned inline, properly cited and verified. All images and photos used in the article are properly licensed on the commons. The thumbnail image used on the nomination is clear at a low resolution and related to the hook. User has less than five DYK credits, therefore QPQ is not required. NOTE: The bibliography and its URLs should be formatted according to WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY, and the introduction should be rearranged to three or four paragraphs according to WP:MOSLEAD, but neither of these are DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 08:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing my nomination! I'm happy with the shorter hook. Just wondering if the bibliography should be removed as it is a duplication of information already covered in the reference section? --Southpaw20 (talk) 07:49, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
ALT1 is also approved and meets DYK criteria. The rest of the article is as per my previous review. There is no proference mandated for how references are formatted. Please see WP:REF and make your own choice. I still suggest looking at WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 08:25, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Article was expanded more than fivefold from May 15 to May 22 and nominated within seven days. Length and sourcing are adequate. Article appear neutral in tone and no plagiarism issues detected. While the Earwig tool highlights many areas, these are proper names, title and quotes which are not violations. Proposed hook is interesting, mentioned inline, properly cited and verified. All images and photos used in the article are properly licensed on the commons. The thumbnail image used on the nomination is clear at a low resolution and related to the hook. User has less than five DYK credits, therefore QPQ is not required. NOTE: The bibliography and its URLs should be formatted according to WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY, and the introduction should be rearranged to three or four paragraphs according to WP:MOSLEAD, but neither of these are DYK criteria. Flibirigit (talk) 08:50, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
ALT1 is also approved and meets DYK criteria. The rest of the article is as per my previous review. There is no proference mandated for how references are formatted. Please see WP:REF and make your own choice. I still suggest looking at WP:BIBLIOGRAPHY. Cheers. Flibirigit (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2020 (UTC)