Template:Did you know nominations/Gotta Get A Grip (Mick Jagger song)


 * 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) 06:23, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Gotta Get A Grip (Mick Jagger song)

 * ... that "Gotta Get A Grip" is one of the newest songs released by Mick Jagger? Source:
 * ALT1:... that "Gotta Get A Grip" is one of the newest singles released by Mick Jagger? Source:
 * ALT2:... that "Gotta Get A Grip" is the latest Mick Jagger solo song since the album Goddess in the Doorway was released in 2001? Source: "The songs are Jagger's first new solo material since 2001's "Goddess In the Doorway.""
 * ALT3:... that "Gotta Get A Grip" is the latest Mick Jagger solo single since the album Goddess in the Doorway was released in 2001? Source: "The songs are Jagger's first new solo material since 2001's "Goddess In the Doorway."" Created by TheSandDoctor (talk). Self-nominated at 06:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg The article was nominated less than seven days after its creation. The article is long enough and neutral and uses inline citations. There do not appear to be copyright violations. Earwig's Copyvio Detector only detected quotations. QPQ is not needed because TheSandDoctor has only one DYK credit. The hooks are cited. Jagger appears to have released songs with other singers since Goddess in the Doorway. Can you edit ALT2 to include that the song is solo material? Gulumeemee (talk) 03:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Done, good catch. You are right though, he has released a lot of material since then with the Stones' etc.--TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg The hooks are good to go. Gulumeemee (talk) 05:31, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! Since the DYK has been approved, could the article itself please be marked as patrolled/reviewed? --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:14, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I cannot mark the page as patrolled because I am not a new page reviewer. Maybe you can ask someone else? Gulumeemee (talk) 09:26, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant to ping and  in the last post, I knew that you could not. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 22:45, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It doesn't look unpatrolled to me. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:49, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

This is because I didn't have the right. I've since requested it. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:58, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I somehow got reviewer and patroller mixed up on the user rights log - my bad. I did tag (an admin) though, so hopefully they will see this and do that. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 23:26, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No big deal. If I get the rights, I'll click the text. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:28, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If you are referring to new page patrol, the page was actually automatically marked as patrolled at 09:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC), when Koavf moved the from mainspace to draft space, then back again . This happened because Koavf has the "autopatrolled" permission, and whenever an autopatrolled user moves something into mainspace, it automatically gets patrolled, as I understand it. So when Koavf moved the page back to mainspace from the draft space, the MediaWiki software marked the page as patrolled automatically.
 * As a side note, TheSandDoctor mentioned two logs called the "patrol log" (Special:Log/patrol) and the "review log" (Special:Log/review). These are two ambiguous and confusing names, and I can help clarify them. The "patrol log" is used by new page reviewers, who have the ability to mark new pages as "patrolled" (also known as "reviewed", confusingly) according to the new page patrol guidelines. The "review log" is used by pending changes reviewers, who have the ability to change the review status for pages under pending changes protection. These two logs serve separate and distinct purposes, and neither require administrator access to use. Mz7 (talk) 06:24, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is what I was referring to and I see that now. I was going strictly off of the page logs (accessible via the page history), which did not include said notice and I did not realize that the auto-patrolled right worked like that. Thank you for your help in this. Since the hooks have been approved, hopefully someone will promote this soon. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 06:31, 7 August 2017 (UTC)