Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Rajeev Nayyar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:41, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Rajeev Nayyar

[edit]

Created by Dee03 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC).

  • The article is new enough, as it was created on 18 December 2016. It is also long enough: "readable prose size" (text only) is 2,821 Bytes (497 words), using User:Dr pda/prosesize.js. The facts mentioned in the hook are cited inline in the article. The source verifies these facts clearly. The hook meets length (192 characters) and format criterion. The article has no images, so no problems there. I used Earwig's Copyvio Detector tool and did not find any copyvio problems either. I can't see a QPQ by Dee03, however I'm not exactly sure how to check this. I must state that this is my first DYK review, so it is probably best that someone double-checks, just in case I've overlooked something. -- Marek.69 talk 01:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
  • QPQ is still needed (the "Reviewed: Soon" above means that the nominator is aware that the QPQ review is still to be done, and plans to provide it in the near future). Marek69, I think the only things you omitted in your review are the icon (each review should start with a single, relevant icon from the list given above the edit window showing the current status, like the one I've used here) and a mention as to whether hook and article meet neutrality guidelines. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
  • New reviewer requested to double-check the original review, and to add the appropriate icon when done. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
@Dee03, Marek69, and BlueMoonset: Article is long enough, uses in-line citations, is neutrally written and was nominated the same day as being created. Spot-checking does not find issues with plagiarism, copyvio, or unduly close paraphrasing. QPQ is complete. Hook is neutral, cited and interesting but a bit long. I have rephrased below.
ALT1 ... that in 1999, Rajeev Nayyar set the record for the longest first-class cricket innings at 1,015 minutes?
If one of you could approve ALT1 we are good to go. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 05:27, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the review, I am okay with ALT1. Dee03 19:27, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Dee03. ALT1 is good to go. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2017 (UTC)