Template:Did you know nominations/Women's Super League


 * 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) 05:23, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Women's Super Rugby, Gloucester-Hartpury Women, Harlequins Ladies, Loughborough Students (Lightning), Waterloo Ladies

 * ... that the Women's Super Rugby, whose new teams include Gloucester-Hartpury Women, Harlequins Ladies, Loughborough Students (Lightning) and Waterloo Ladies, was questioned in Parliament for violating equality law because a rugby club with 15 years in top flight was excluded in favour of them?
 * ALT1 ... that the Women's Super Rugby, whose new teams include Gloucester-Hartpury Women, Harlequins Ladies, Loughborough Students (Lightning) and Waterloo Ladies, was questioned by a Member of Parliament for violating equality law because it had fewer teams than the men's Premiership?  Source: Lichfield Mercury
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Rearing Horse and Mounted Warrior, Template:Did you know nominations/Foreign policy of the Donald Trump administration, Template:Did you know nominations/SS Tyndareus, Template:Did you know nominations/Grosvenor Gardens House, Template:Did you know nominations/Kirchenlied

Created by The C of E (talk) and Ânes-pur-sàng (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 13:15, 31 March 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg These five articles are all newly created. It seems to me that the auto-generated credits are incorrect, because Ânes-pur-sàng seems to have been working on Women's Super Rugby but not the other articles, but is credited with all of them. All five articles are new enough and long enough. The articles are neutral and I detected no policy issues. The facts being used for the hook have inline citations, but the hook needs to be worded differently because the argument being put forward seems to have been that the new league had fewer clubs than the equivalent men's league and that this "breached the spirit of the Equalities Act". Nor can you actually have "Women's Super Rugby ... was questioned in Parliament" because the matter may have been raised in parliament but the league will not have been there. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I have altered the hook so it is more on the inequality of teams. As for the credits, that was the way it came out when I put it through the nomination template but that can be manually sorted at promotion.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 07:20, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I have replaced the original hook, and struck it, and labelled your new suggestion as ALT1. I am not sure of the merits of the argument on sexual equality but I would prefer the more straightforward ALT2 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:38, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * ALT2 ... that the newly established Women's Super Rugby league will include Gloucester-Hartpury Women, Harlequins Ladies, Loughborough Students (Lightning) and Waterloo Ladies, but will exclude a team that has been in the top flight for 15 years?


 * Quite right in that I was not involved in the team pages, I just created the competition page. I would prefer ALT1. Ânes-pur-sàng (talk) 10:20, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Both look good to me, I have no particular preference on which one is used.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 18:38, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I have adjusted the credits, and we will ask somebody else to decide on the best hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:50, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg I concur with the previous review. I don't think ALT1 is cited in each article (only in the first article), so I will only support ALT2. Good to go.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:52, 13 May 2017 (UTC)