Template:Did you know nominations/Defense Officer Personnel Management Act

The following discussion 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Defense Officer Personnel Management Act edit

Created/expanded by Ramos37 (talk). Self nom at 18:48, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

  • New enough (created as part of "articles for Creation", made live on 2 December). Certainly long enough (9,000+). However the specific hook fact is not currently footnoted. I suspect that the main source (Rostker) will say it somewhere but that currently only footnotes the fact that "up or out" exists in the Navy. Up_or_out#Up_or_out cites the same source but I would like to see a page reference for this not just the whole document. Wittylama 01:19, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! Learning as I go...I added the page number and will edit throughout. Ramos37 (talk) 07:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)ramos37 Page numbers added (and verified there there are no references to "Gibraltar")

  • Sorry I didn't respond sooner - thanks for the edit. Good to go. I've also removed the hidden draft tags that were left at the top of the article from before it was a live article. Wittylama
  • Numerous unreferenced paragraphs. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:38, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
    • While it is certainly true that the article is not comprehensively or densely footnoted, I disagree that there are numerous, or indeed any, wholly unreferenced paragraphs. Wittylama 04:25, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I did have a few paras not referenced; I cleaned those up and found another source. Thanks all for taking the time to check my work. Ramos37 (talk) 05:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Looking better, but the first paragraph of OPA and OGLA needs a footnote. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Footnote added. Ramos37 (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Alright, looking good. Tick based on Wittylama's review. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)