Template:Did you know nominations/Harvard Environmental Law Review


 * 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 Vanamonde (talk) 10:06, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Harvard Environmental Law Review

 * ... that according to one observer, the original format of the Harvard Environmental Law Review was "too ambitious"? Source: "Early editors modified the original format because it was too ambitious to ask students to research and write a comprehensive overview of recent developments every year." (Bonnie Docherty, 25 Years or HELR: The Invention and Reinvention of Environmental Law, 25 Harv. Envt'l L. Rev. 323, 328 (2001)).
 * Reviewed: Ali al-Muqri

Converted from a redirect by Notecardforfree (talk). Self-nominated at 11:52, 7 November 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Size, newness through expansion, and hook check out. QPQ looks good. Sadads (talk) 02:09, 28 November 2016 (UTC)


 * ALT1 ... that the focus of Harvard Environmental Law Review was changed because the original format was "too ambitious"?
 * I have rewritten the hook to ALT1, because it is not clear who made the comment, it was probably the editors rather than an observer. Please could you approve ALT1 and confirm that you checked the article for neutrality and policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * For the record, I think ALT1 is mich better than the original. Many thanks, . Best, -- Notecardforfree (talk) 07:37, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg They both work, similar idea, and both fit well as hooks, Sadads (talk) 13:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)