Template:Did you know nominations/United States Navy staff corps
- 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 Allen3 talk 11:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
United States Navy staff corps
[edit]- ... that women are currently chiefs of the U.S. Navy Civil Engineer, Medical, Chaplain, Nurse, and Judge Advocate General's Corps, which are a majority of the eight Navy staff corps?
- Reviewed: Solar storm of 2012
5x expanded by Antony-22 (talk). Self nominated at 02:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC).
Article wasn't expanded fivefold. It was 4543 bytes before Antony-22 started editing it and it's 16199 bytes now. The DYK Check tool seems to think it's been expanded enough. If there's some other way this math has to be done, please explain. The hook (182 characters) is short enough, appears in the article, and is sourced. The article is long enough, isn't COPYVIO (it looks like a paragraph found in mediander is either a mirror or posting govt public domain content), and is within policy. QPQ was done. Chris Troutman (talk) 00:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- Per WP:DYK#Eligibility criteria rule 1b, only readable prose is counted for the expansion, and the table doesn't count as readable prose. DYK Check correctly accounts for this. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 04:04, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Chris troutman|, DYK doesn't count in bytes, it measures prose characters, which is why DYKcheck gives results the way it does. The article had 1227 prose characters prior to the expansion on January 12, which would require an expansion to 6135 prose characters. It currently has 6145 prose characters, which fulfills the 5x expansion requirement with 10 characters to spare. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Article seems to be expanded 5x by my own calculations. Obviously long enough and is within policy (no plagiarism detected aside from the public domain source commented above). Hook is interesting and cited. QPQ is in order. Nice work. 23W 07:10, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
