Template:Did you know nominations/Royal Stag


 * 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 PFHLai (talk) 02:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Royal Stag

 * ... that the Indian whisky Royal Stag is Pernod Ricard's biggest-selling brand?


 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Flicker (song)

Improved to Good Article status by Human3015 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:38, 18 January 2016 (UTC).

The history of Royal Stag indicates the article expansion began on January 9, and the DYK nomination was made on January 18, two days over the 7-day window. Before the expansion, the Word Count was 1479. At 8:07 PM PST, the Word Count tool showed it had 1335 words, so it does not pass the 5X expansion minimum, or the 5,000 character minimum for the prose section. The Earwig copyvio test hows the article has no serious copyvios, plagiarism or close paraphrasing. in my opinion. The hook contains 75 characters, which passes length criterion. The hook fact is cited with an in-line citation. It is moderately interesting, though I wonder if a more attention grabbing hook could be found. There is no negative statement about any living individual. The nomination passes the QPQ criterion. The corporate logo is non-free use image, but the fair use rationale seems to conform to Wikipedia policy. This issue was apparently discussed and resolved prior to the current expansion. Bruin2 (talk) 04:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * This is a new GA, not a 5x expansion, and it meets the newness criterion. -Zanhe (talk) 15:47, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg GA status achieved on day of DYK nomination. New enough, long enough, well referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. Hook refs verified and cited inline. QPQ done. I tweaked the grammar in the hook (and in the article). Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 16:04, 31 January 2016 (UTC)