Did you know nomination

5x expanded by JustJamie820 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 8 past nominations.

JustJamie820 (talk) 23:35, 11 March 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Hook is cited and the article is so, so nearly there, but you're a few bytes shorts from meeting the "5x expanded" criteria. Leaving this open so that you can address this. Jordano53 07:24, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JustJamie820 and Jordano53: 5x expansion is done by characters, not bytes. Pre-expansion, this was 1388 characters and it's now 6429, a roughly 4.63x expansion. I'd IAR that given that this is clearly approaching GA quality, but I would want the article nominated for that first. For what it's worth, I don't think quickfail QPQs should count, but this was discussed last month and no consensus was formed.--Launchballer 14:59, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JustJamie820 and Launchballer: With your blessing, I'll IAR and pass this on then! Thanks for your quality work. Jordano53 15:23, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jordano53 and Launchballer: Jordano, thank you for reviewing, and Launchballer, thank you for also contributing (and, honestly, telling me it's close to GA...that's an honor because I just thought of it as B-class at most). Just for clarity, do I need to add more words to get this to pass, or does the IAR ideal make it okay without a GA nomination? I have no problem with adding more info (though I always thought a DYK article couldn't change too much from its nomination to its placement on the front page), but I'll need some time (not too much, but some) to figure out what sort of data I can add to bulk up the article. Oh, one more thing, I will look for a different QPQ that isn't liable to be quickfailed. This will help the backlog. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No tags for this post.