Overall: The article is neutral, new enough, long enough, and the Earwig tool does not indicate that copyright violations are likely to be present. The claim made in the hook, which is both short enough and interesting, is supported by a citation. Additionally, QPQ has been satisfied. Overall, I see no reason not to approve this DYK submission. JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I was looking to move some hooks to the prep area when I came across this. I gotta say, I really don't think this meets WP:DYKINT. Two places competing with and lowering their price a bit isn't DYK worthy from my perspective, and I'd expect it to be one of the lower view counts of the month (possibly year) if accepted. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:54, 20 January 2025 (UTC)