A fact from Georgia RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 September 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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.
Overall: @Antony-22: The article was created today. Its length is fine at 2323 B and so is the length of the hook at 161 characters. All claims in the body of the article have inline citations. I didn't see any unreliable sources or biased claims. The diverse selection of cases in the hook is interesting. It has 4 sources, each one supporting one case. WP:EARWIG shows no problems with copyright violations or plagiarism. QPQ was done. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Phlsph7: Pulling back from prep. Apparently User:HandsomeFella changed the proposed hook directly without commenting on it, and the review and promotion occurred so quickly that no one noticed. (Generally an ALT should be proposed, or if the change is minor, a comment should be made drawing attention to it.) I also realized that "law" is more clear than "act", so here's a slight revision. Hopefully this can be quickly re-approved. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 00:28, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I missed the intermediate edit by HandsomeFella since I did not check the nomination template history. I agree, it would have been better to propose an alternative hook or at least to add a comment explaining the change. ALT1 works fine: approve. Phlsph7 (talk) 07:12, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]