- 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 SL93 talk 21:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Aon v Australian National University
Moved to mainspace by
MaxnaCarta (
talk).
Number of QPQs required:
1. Nominator has 15 past nominations.
— MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:10, 18 December 2024 (UTC).
@MaxnaCarta: New enough and long enough. QPQ present. Lyons p558 checks out as the source. (Have you thought about shortened footnotes with how often you cite that source?) I just wish the hook was a little more, uh, hooky. Right now, it's as dry as Mt Stromlo before the bushfires. Can we try something like this? Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that Aon v Australian National University overturned a precedent that encouraged litigation-prolonging amendments to pleadings?
- @Sammi Brie: Thanks alot for reviewing. Footnotes will be changed if I nom for GA, definitely. Im happy with the proposed alt hook. Thanks! — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
For someone else to approve the ALT1 hook (same source) since I suggested it. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:51, 31 December 2024 (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
|
|
|
Overall:
Good article which increased my knowledge of the nuances of the Australian legal system. Approve hook
ALT1.
TarnishedPathtalk 11:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
Good article which increased my knowledge of the nuances of the Australian legal system. Approve hook ALT1. TarnishedPathtalk 11:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)