Template:Did you know nominations/Sonic Gems Collection


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Sonic Gems Collection

 * ... that SegaSonic the Hedgehog was desired for inclusion in Sonic Gems Collection, but was left out due to difficulties emulating its trackball controls?
 * Comment: Feel free to suggest ALT hooks.
 * Comment: Feel free to suggest ALT hooks.

Improved to Good Article status by TheJoebro64 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:43, 28 February 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg made a thorough GA review of the article, with all the points brought up resolved by the nominator, subsequently solidifying my opinions about the article's quality in terms of its good use of citations and its use of language to keep an objective view, especially in the "Reception" section. I see no problems with this nomination, as the hook is especially great, appealing to a very broad audience by providing a legitimately interesting trivia (one that I most certainly never knew before reading this) on one of the most popular video game franchises, Sonic the Hedgehog. Both this hook and the associated article are some of the best I've seen reviewing DYK, after a year of doing so. Good job, Joebro! – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · contribs · [//xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/?username=PhilipTerryGraham&project=en.wikipedia.org count]) 13:56, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg you should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been met. A convenient Reviewer's Template is located above the edit window. Yoninah (talk) 01:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I don’t see why I need a box format to do something that can easily be achieved with a single text paragraph. Nominations are approved all the time without box formats. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · contribs · [//xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/?username=PhilipTerryGraham&project=en.wikipedia.org count]) 06:11, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No, you don't; it was just a suggestion. But your review did not mention any of the criteria for DYK, namely: newness, length, neutrality, close paraphrasing, inline hook cite, verified or AGF hook, and QPQ review. Yoninah (talk) 11:46, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * So far, I've observed the common understanding is that if there's a problem, it will be explicitly pointed out. This is how I went about my review, and I assumed that others would add to it, as they always do. Currently, I see no problems with the review. Everything satisfying the criteria can either was either cited in the GA review, discernible using information available in the nomination itself or stated in my review. An example of such being that I explicitly said that neutrality and citations were okay. As far as I'm concerned, that was my review. If somebody else wants to step in and point out flaws in the nomination, that's fine by me. I can't be the sole person reviewing things, after all. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · contribs · [//xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/?username=PhilipTerryGraham&project=en.wikipedia.org count]) 13:50, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The more explicit you are, the better it is for the prep builder and the administrator promoting to the queue. You've spent a lot of words explaining yourself when you could just have noted the criteria you checked. My standard line is: "New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen, hook ref verified (or AGF) and cited inline, images freely licensed, QPQ done". BTW a GA review is no guarantee that the DYK criteria have been met. Yoninah (talk) 18:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed, since prior reviewer has not returned to confirm that they checked the article and hook against all the DYK criteria themselves. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:45, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. JOE BRO  64  18:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks! You're good to go! Also no copyvio concerns, no need for a QPQ because less than minimum DYKs. Article is really awesome, great work!  Nomader  ( talk ) 20:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks! You're good to go! Also no copyvio concerns, no need for a QPQ because less than minimum DYKs. Article is really awesome, great work!  Nomader  ( talk ) 20:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)