Talk:Edwin Atwater

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Edwin Atwater. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:02, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Bruxton talk 18:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edwin Atwater
Edwin Atwater

5x expanded by Z1720 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Edwin Atwater; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • : Procedural decline: Now Approved: the article is generally in good shape, nicely written and fully cited to solid-looking sources. No BLP or copyvio concerns in evidence. ALT0 is good, source checks out and seems reliable enough. One image, which is clearly PD (I've added the necessary US tag). However, I can't see that the article is eligible: it was created in 2006, was last at 1/5 its size in 2015, and isn't yet a GA. Perhaps nominate it as such and bring it back? UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @UndercoverClassicist: Using the DYK check script, Before the expansion, the article had 981 characters and 154 words of "readable prose size". It now has 5384 characters or 905 words "readable prose size", which fulfils the 5x expansion requirement. Z1720 (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]