Template talk:Editnotices/Group/Template:Did you know nominations

Proposal for switching the position of Article and Hook criteria within editnotice template
Template:Editnotices/Group/Template:Did you know nominations contains criteria when reviewing the nomination.

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Proposal: I propose to switch position of Article and Hook criteria.
 * Rationale: It usually takes much more time to review the whole article and to deal with all its issues then to review the hook. There are cases when you lose a lot of time to review the article and then when you start reviewing the hook you notice serious problems which disqualify the nomination. Switching the position of the Article and Hook criteria could save time in such cases.

Requested edit
I don't know which admins work DYK and would be willing to fill this, but I have a minor gripe. Currently, the blank copyable templates look like this:

Because of the unevenness of the lines, this is kind of a pain in the ass to fill out. They're so close to lining up, but they don't, and I hate it. Therefore, I propose the copyable templates be changed to display like this:

I probably ought to ping someone for this (since the last edit request on this talk page seems to have been in 2012 and remains unanswered). jp×g 23:13, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * How about it? jp×g 23:14, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. You owe me. EEng 04:01, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:58, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Excellent! My neurosis has been satisfied (It seems that the second one -- with the blank parameters -- went missing somehow, but I will chalk that up to "artistic license"). jp×g 13:03, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure how that happened, but I've fixed it now. Otherwise they might revoke my artistic license. EEng 15:10, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 October 2022
The hidden text Check to see if the hook fact is backed by a source. If it is, check the source (if readily available) and make sure it contains the fact and is reliable. "AGF" (assume good faith) may be entered if hook it cited to an offline source contains a typo ("hook it cited") and should be corrected to Check to see if the hook fact is backed by a source. If it is, check the source (if readily available) and make sure it contains the fact and is reliable. "AGF" (assume good faith) may be entered if hook is cited to an offline source. dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 14:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)