Template:Did you know nominations/Politics in The Simpsons

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) 21:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Politics in The Simpsons

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that politics in The Simpsons is a microcosm of local government? Source: Woodcock, Pete (June 1, 2008). "Gender, Politicians and Public Health: Using The Simpsons to Teach Politics". European Political Science. 7 (2): 153–164. doi:10.1057/eps.2008.5. ISSN 1682-0983.
  • ALT1: ... that U.S. Senator Ted Cruz references politics in The Simpsons despite protest from the show's cast and crew? Source: Bradley, Laura (February 22, 2018). "A Brief History of Ted Cruz's One-Sided Obsession With The Simpsons". Vanity Fair. Retrieved September 2, 2022.
  • ALT2: ... that politics in The Simpsons has caused controversy in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, and Japan? Source: ARGENTINA: Reel, Monte (April 17, 2008). "D'oh! 'Simpsons' Again Angers South Americans". Washington Post. Retrieved April 20, 2008.
    AUSTRALIA AND JAPAN: Dobson, Hugo (2006). "Mister Sparkle Meets the Yakuza: Depictions of Japan in The Simpsons". The Journal of Popular Culture. 39 (1): 44–68. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5931.2006.00203.x. ISSN 0022-3840.
    BRAZIL: Turner, Chris (2004). Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Documented an Era and Defined a Generation. (1st ed.). pp. 325–326. Toronto: Random House Canada. ISBN 978-0-679-31318-2. OCLC 55682258.
  • Reviewed: [[]]

Improved to Good Article status by Thebiguglyalien (talk). Self-nominated at 16:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Thebiguglyalien: Good article. Since this seems to be your third nomination no qpq is required. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)