Template:Did you know nominations/Tachikawa air disaster

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 Allen3 ^talk 10:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Tachikawa air disaster edit

(

)

* ... that the Douglas C-124 Globemaster II involved in the Tachikawa air disaster, where over 100 were killed, crashed into a watermelon patch?

Reviewed: Not a self nom

Created by TH235SilverLover (talk). Nominated by Matty.007 (talk) at 18:58, 15 September 2013 (UTC).

Good for size, time, copyvio, DABs, and external links. Missing some cites. Not thrilled with the wording of the hook. How about something along the lines of "...crashed into a watermelon patch, killing all 127 aboard" or somesuch?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:13, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, Alt 1: ... that the Douglas C-124 Globemaster II (one pictured) involved in the Tachikawa air disaster crashed into a watermelon patch, with all hands lost? Also, I would like to have this picture which is used in the article in the hook. Thanks, Mat ty.007 17:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, that phrasing works. Add the needed cites and we'll be done here.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:24, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

OK, will do (I am quite busy for the next few days, so please be patient). Thanks, Mat ty.007 19:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

No rush.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

While there wasn't a big rush, three weeks is excessive. This nomination needs to be properly dealt with: it should not take this long to come up with three inline source citations. Please supply them within the next week. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, had forgotten about this, and will try and find sources soon. Mat ty.007 17:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. Sturmvogel 66: can you re-review this please? Thanks, Mat ty.007 16:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Good to go, although I'd strongly recommend combining several of your very short paragraphs. Forex, the 2nd para of the lede fits right in with the first para.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Is it not OK as the lede is meant to summarize the article? Otherwise, is this tick-worthy? Thanks, Mat ty.007 17:46, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Please can someone with DYK know-how input the picture I said about above please? Thanks, Mat ty.007 17:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. I've also struck the original hook, added the missing "..." and "pictured" to ALT1, and adjusted the lede per Sturmvogel 66's request (which I agree with). Once Sturmvogel 66 confirms that the new picture is both in the article and properly licensed and given this the necessary approval tick, it should be ready. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

The pic is appropriately licensed and in the article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)