Template:Did you know nominations/T-Babe

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) 06:21, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

T-Babe

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that, when Glasgow Records couldn't find a suitable singer to perform their dance tunes, they decided instead to create one?

• ALT1:... that Glasgow Records were offered £10 million to develop their character T-Babe, but turned it down?
• Reviewed: Lois Jones (scientist)

Moved to mainspace by A Thousand Doors (talk). Self-nominated at 08:56, 23 June 2016 (UTC).

• No issues found.
  • ✓ This article is new and was created on 22:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 2897 characters
  • ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
  • ✓ This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
  • ✓ The probability of copyright violation is 2.0%. (confirm)
    • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
• ✓ The hook ALT0 is an appropriate length at 128 characters
• ✓ The hook ALT1 is an appropriate length at 109 characters
• ✗ This is A Thousand Doors's 8th nomination. A QPQ review is required for this nomination.

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This bot is experimental; please report any issues. This is not a substitute for a human review. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 23:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

• QPQ now done. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 16:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

• Bot results are correct, and QPQ has been done. Article is well-written and neutral, and hooks are interesting and cited. No copyright concerns detected. This should be good to go. Random86 (talk) 07:21, 2 July 2016 (UTC)