Template:Did you know nominations/Member of parliament, Lok Sabha


 * 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: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 22:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Ineligible per newness requirement

Member of parliament, Lok Sabha

 * ...that 2 out of 552 members of parliament of Lok Sabha (member of lower house of Parliament of India) are not elected but nominated by the President of India and must belong to the Anglo-Indian group?


 * Reviewed: Annie Poon
 * Comment: Nomination in line with DYKPN

Created by AKS.9955 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:49, 8 August 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol delete vote.svg The article was created on July 16, which would normally require a nomination be made within seven days, or by July 23; this was nominated on August 8, 23 days after creation. While DYKPN does say that "probably a few more" days beyond the seven will be okay, when it's an experienced nominator, there is less leniency for late nominations than for new participants, and 16 days late is well beyond what is acceptable even for novices. I have no hesitation in marking this as far too late to qualify for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * BlueMoonset, the DYKPN clearly reads "If your article was created or expanded after the oldest date listed in Template talk:Did you know, it may still be approved". The oldest nomination is 13 May 2016.  Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  16:22, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * And it may not, AKS.9955. In this case, not. If you check WP:DYKSG, you'll see further details; at the moment, we have around 200 hooks, which is a large backlog even excluding the dozens of approved Olympics hooks, which are not included in that count. I'm sorry; this is simply too late by a significant margin—as I said, a few days might be possible; a couple of weeks just isn't, and that's been DYK practice for years. I'm sorry it didn't work out this time; the article can still be eligible if it eventually becomes a Good Article. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
 * BlueMoonset, I went by DYKPN which made this article eligible for DYK. As you pointed out the WP:DYKSG, lets leave it here. Kindly close the DYK nomination as you may deem fit. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  17:00, 8 August 2016 (UTC)