Template:Did you know nominations/Nilgai


 * 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 Yoninah (talk) 11:29, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Nilgai

 * ... that the nilgai (pictured) might have been domesticated in the Indus Valley Civilisation?


 * ALT1:... that the nilgai (pictured) has been declared as a vermin in Bihar, India?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ruth Taubert Seeger

Improved to Good Article status by Sainsf (talk). Self-nominated at 13:51, 29 May 2016 (UTC).


 * Article is very comprehensive on the subject, both hooks are cited and mentioned in the article. No citation needed templates or any other maintenance templates in the article. I think ALT1 should be the one which should go up since it's the more "interesting" of the two (you don't normally see antelopes being called vermin). ✅ Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:02, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg User:Narutolovehinata5 you should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been met. When you approve a nomination, please use one of the check marks that appear just above the editing window. Thank you, Yoninah (talk) 09:36, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * , was notified by you on June 7, and in spite of otherwise actively editing elsewhere, has not responded here.  It's time to let this good faith nomination move forward.  I'm doing a review below. — Maile  (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah sorry about that, I thought merely saying that the article passed (regardless of using the official checkmark templates or not) was enough to pass DYKs. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:37, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Review by Maile
 * QPQ
 * May 29, 2016 QPQ review by Sainsf has not been used by him as a QPQ on any previous nomination
 * Eligibility
 * Article was promoted to Good Article status on May 29, 2016 and has 23526 characters (0 words) "readable prose size"
 * Article is NPOV, currently stable (only minor edits since GA), no edit wars, no dispute tags
 * Sourcing
 * Every paragraph sourced inline, offline as well as online
 * Citations are appropriately formatted
 * No bare URLs
 * Hook
 * Hook is 90 characters, NPOV, stated in the article and sourced
 * ALT1 is 73 characters, NPOV, stated in the article and sourced
 * Image
 * Image is used in the article and appropriately licensed on Commons
 * Tools
 * Earwig's tool shows no concerns
 * Labs Duplication Detector spot check on sourcing shows no issues of concern
 * Checklinks shows all citation external links are working links, two are redirect links and one requires registration
 * Dab solver says there are no disambiguation links in the article

Nomination passes. — Maile (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)