Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/John D'Orazio

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 Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

John D'Orazio

5x expanded by Steelkamp (talk). Self-nominated at 16:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC).

  • This is not a review, but this hook fails DYK criteria 4a: "Articles and hooks that focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals...should be avoided." ♠PMC(talk) 16:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Some new hooks: theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 09:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Oh sorry, I forgot about this. I like ALT1 the best. I have changed it slightly as he was not a minister at the time, but it sounds better than the one I came up with, which I have put below. Steelkamp (talk) 07:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Question Hi Steelkamp, it doesn't look like there has been much progress on the removal of the neutrality tag. Does a solution to this look to be forthcoming? If not, this nomination may need to be rejected. Vladimir.copic (talk) 02:19, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
    • I'm working on this now. Steelkamp (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
@Steelkamp: Is this ready for a new review? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:51, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Yes it is. Steelkamp (talk) 04:53, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

I shall review this. Storye book (talk) 16:30, 3 July 2022 (UTC)


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

Overall: Thank you for a carefully neutral and painstaking article on this slightly dodgy politician. Earwig is uploading too slowly for me today, so I am accepting AGF that there is no plagiarism.

  • ALT1: This ALT is written out in the article, but I cannot find The Age in the refs using a page search. However there are other citations close by, which are satisfactory. I approve ALT1.
  • ALT3: The facts of this ALT appear in the article, with the Perth Now citation as mentioned above. I approve ALT3.
Summary: This is good to go. Storye book (talk) 16:52, 3 July 2022 (UTC)