Template:Did you know nominations/Soccer kick


 * 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 Orlady (talk) 20:44, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Soccer kick

 * ... that soccer kicks can cause serious injury if done improperly?
 * Reviewed: Ashford, Kent
 * Comment: This is about the MMA move, not the football kick. It is intended to be more hook-y like this.

5x expanded by The C of E (talk). Self nominated at 10:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg  Five-fold expansion and newness thereof confirmed.  The article is essentially neutral and uses inline citations.  Spotchecking doesn't reveal copyvio or plagiarism issues.  Hook is short enough and quite hooky.  However, I don't see that the hook fact is supported by the source.  The source cited (linked here) seems to describe the MMA soccer kick to a person's head as something that is extremely dangerous.  It suggests such a kick is per se improper and dangerous and does not imply or state that such a move is safe if done "properly" as opposed to "improperly." Cbl62 (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT 1: ... that a football kick can be as powerful as a soccer kick?
 * I adjusted the article to remove the reference to it being "proper", and came up with a new hook that is similarly confusing the two sports. ViperSnake151   Talk  01:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Alt2 ... that soccer kicks can cause serious injury?  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 07:11, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg The "alt 2" looks fine.  Cbl62 (talk) 18:01, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Per DYK Reviewing guide In addition to at least 1,500 characters of readable prose, the article must not be a stub. This requires a judgement call, since there is no mechanical stub definition (see the Croughton-London rule). If an article is, in fact, a stub, you should temporarily reject the nomination; if the article is not a stub, ensure that it is correctly marked as a non-stub, by removing any stub template(s) in the article, and changing any talk-page assessments to start-class or higher. — Maile (talk) 22:00, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems like a minor technicality but I have changed the stub class to C. please put the green tick back.  The C of E  God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 08:18, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Verifying the stub was removed. — Maile (talk) 11:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)