Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Harvester (H19): Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
True - delete symbol removed |
||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
--> |
--> |
||
:* |
:* This was not added to the nominations page until October 28. While some leeway is always allowed with the five-day rule, articles that are three weeks old are certainly not eligible anymore. - [[User:PM800|PM800]] ([[User talk:PM800|talk]]) 07:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
::*I'd ask that you reconsider as the article was nominated at the proper time, but I forgot to transclude it for review. So it did meet the five-day rule.--[[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) 21:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC) |
::*I'd ask that you reconsider as the article was nominated at the proper time, but I forgot to transclude it for review. So it did meet the five-day rule.--[[User:Sturmvogel 66|Sturmvogel 66]] ([[User talk:Sturmvogel 66|talk]]) 21:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC) |
||
*This [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3ADid_you_know_nominations%2FHMS_Harvester_%28H19%29&action=historysubmit&diff=457898084&oldid=454992235 is the case]. I've removed the delete symbol PM800 put in place above. I think we have to make allowances for mistakes with the new system. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 03:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC) |
|||
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
Revision as of 03:55, 1 November 2011
HMS Harvester (H19)
- ... that the British destroyer HMS Harvester sank one German submarine by ramming on 3 March 1943 whilst escorting Convoy HX 228, but was sunk by another submarine the following day?
- Reviewed: Pillnitz Castle
Created/expanded by Sturmvogel 66 (talk). Nominated by Sturmvogel 66 (talk) at 05:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- This was not added to the nominations page until October 28. While some leeway is always allowed with the five-day rule, articles that are three weeks old are certainly not eligible anymore. - PM800 (talk) 07:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'd ask that you reconsider as the article was nominated at the proper time, but I forgot to transclude it for review. So it did meet the five-day rule.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- This is the case. I've removed the delete symbol PM800 put in place above. I think we have to make allowances for mistakes with the new system. Johnbod (talk) 03:55, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
[[Category:Pending DYK nominations|]]