- 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) 07:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Falls on the West Kill
5x expanded by Daniel Case (talk) and Bacardi379 (talk). Nominated by Daniel Case (talk) at 19:56, 12 January 2018 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough
|
|
|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
|
|
|
Overall: 
Article was expanded within 7 days when nominated, was expanded more than 5x (~800 chars to >28,000 chars), is appropriately neutral and has no plagiarism issues that I can see. QPQ is done. The hook is interesting and supported, and the hook image is clear and properly licensed. I corrected a couple of spots where the wrong paper was cited; I'll go through the second half of the article in greater depth to look for other such cases shortly. The first paragraph of the "History" section has no citation currently. It's very close; once I review all the other citations and we get one for the paragraph that's lacking one, it should be ready to go. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Bryanrutherford0: Sorry I had missed that; since the citation is from a book that is not in preview at Google Books I had to get the hard-copy version off the shelf so I had meant to do that after the weekend. I have it now, with a long quote section since it's not as easy to verify that online. Daniel Case (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
- Yep, that fixes it! With that, this article looks ready to go!-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 21:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Article was expanded within 7 days when nominated, was expanded more than 5x (~800 chars to >28,000 chars), is appropriately neutral and has no plagiarism issues that I can see. QPQ is done. The hook is interesting and supported, and the hook image is clear and properly licensed. I corrected a couple of spots where the wrong paper was cited; I'll go through the second half of the article in greater depth to look for other such cases shortly. The first paragraph of the "History" section has no citation currently. It's very close; once I review all the other citations and we get one for the paragraph that's lacking one, it should be ready to go. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 19:28, 15 January 2018 (UTC)