Template:Did you know nominations/Palestinian wine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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: rejected by Jolly Ω Janner 03:55, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Palestinian wine[edit]

Created by Chesdovi (talk). Self-nominated at 15:44, 1 February 2016 (UTC).

New enough, long enough, but redundant with Israeli wine. The DYK fails as it should be merged with Israeli wine. There is also a bias issue and it is Nominated for deletion. Sorry.Zigzig20s (talk) 01:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
With clear majority on deletion discussion, the article will not be deleted and will not be merged. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
  • New review needed. Note that the deletion discussion for Palestinian wine closed as keep. As such, opinion in the review above is not represented by consensus. North America1000 08:16, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Date and length fine. However there are a few issues with the article. There are a number of tags on some of the sources which would need to be addressed/cleared before it can proceed. The proposed hook also isn't in the article. The sentence that references the House of Commons refers to resentment amongst Arabs but doesn't mention Jewish consumption. A QPQ is also needed. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:38, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
  • A week onwards from The C of E's comment and many of the problems he mentioned are still apparent. There are maintenance templates all over the article, while a QPQ has not been provided either. I'm afraid time has run out.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 16:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Since nominator Chesdovi was neither pinged here nor talk-page notified, I think we should do both now and allow another week for action to be taken. The required fixes and the QPQ will be needed as noted above. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:17, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Another week has come and gone without the nominator responding or addressing the problem. Regrettably, the time has come to mark this DYK as unsuccessful and close it.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 17:42, 5 March 2016 (UTC)