Template:Did you know nominations/Su Rong


 * 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 97198 (talk) 02:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Su Rong

 * ... that Su Rong is the highest-ranking official to come under investigation for corruption since Xi Jinping became China's president?
 * Reviewed: Anubrata Mandal

5x expanded by Zanhe (talk). Self nominated at 08:11, 19 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)
 * Done. -Zanhe (talk) 00:26, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Verifying the stub has been removed.  Needs complete review. — Maile  (talk) 12:48, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg New enough (expanded 19 June, nom 19 June) and long enough. QPQ done. The hook is repeated in full in the article, is hooky enough and short enough, and checks out with online citation #4. Article text is objective, neutral and fully referenced. No problems with disambig links or with access to external links. External links in English were checked for possible sources of copyvio or close paraphrasing; none found. Note: we have already had a long discussion on one of these nom templates about whether close paraphrasing is possible when translating Chinese or Japanese characters, and the consensus was negative. Previous issues are resolved. This nom is good to go. --Storye book (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)