Template:Did you know nominations/2003 Carolina Dodge Dealers 400
- 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) 05:22, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
2003 Carolina Dodge Dealers 400
- ... that a finishing gap of 0.002 seconds at the 2003 Carolina Dodge Dealers 400 was the closest finish in NASCAR Cup Series history since the introduction of electronic scoring in 1993? Source: NASCAR's Busch and Craven Recall Darlington Finish 15 Years Later": The Drive & No denying Craven: No. 32 bumps off Busch at line": The Dayona Beach News-Journal
- ALT1:... that the 2003 Carolina Dodge Dealers 400 was the 100th NASCAR Cup Series race to be held at Darlington Raceway? Source: Darlington's 100th race may be its last in spring": Indianapolis Star
Improved to Good Article status by MWright96 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:40, 4 April 2020 (UTC).
Hmm, this looks familiar... GA, in time, long enough, sourced, no apparent copyvios, in-line hook citations check out, QPQ done. Strong preference for ALT0. MWright96, I've removed the "joint-" from "joint-closest finish"; "joint" might be appropriate if the hook were written in the present tense, but since the hook is written in the past tense—and the tie only happened later—it is not needed here. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
Usernameunique, regrettably, you are not an eligible reviewer for this nomination, since you were the reviewer at GAN per WP:DYKSG#H2: You're not allowed to approve your own hook or article, nor may you review an article if it's a recently listed Good Article that you either nominated or reviewed for GA (though you can still nominate it for DYK).
The idea is that a new reviewer might spot something that the original reviewer might have overlooked in their review (and indeed this has happened in the past). So we're going to need a fresh review by someone not involved with the GA review. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:44, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
- I will do a full review, due to the need for an independent reviewer
Article is long enough (20338 characters), is a GA, nominated in time (GA on 9 April, nominated on 12 April) and article is within policy- ALT0 is short enough, interesting, and well cited. ALT1 is far less interesting in my opinion, so I suggest we use ALT0
- QPQ done
- Overall, this nomination passes, congratulations. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
