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
Cielquiparle (
talk) 07:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
The hook as currently written is not intriguing to a non-specialist audience considering it assumes reader familiarity with all the terms and names mentioned in the hook. Otherwise the article meets DYK requirements and is free from close paraphrasing. The nominator has no prior DYK nominations so a QPQ is not required.
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions) 10:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
While more understandable, I'm not really sure if it's still interesting to a non-specialist audience. Given that this is tech-related I'd like to hear
DigitalIceAge's thoughts on ALT1.
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions) 01:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Agree that the hooks require foreknowledge of SIGPLAN and its eminence to be interesting. Why not mention something about Coq itself? E.g. ALT2: ... that Thierry Coquand's namesake
Coq proof assistant was used to find a formal proof of the
four color theorem? Or if we want to mention the award, we can say ALT2b: ... that Thierry Coquand won a
SIGPLAN award for his eponymous
Coq proof assistant, which was used to find a formal proof of the
four color theorem? A bit long but more interesting IMO.
DigitalIceAge (
talk) 01:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I personally like ALT2b the best.
Partofthemachine (
talk) 22:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I like both ALT2s better than the ALT1 I proposed. Is there a typo in it? ("formal proof of*...")? Only other concern is if there's an issue calling it "his" as he's among several creators.
Wracking💬 22:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I changed "proof or" to "proof of" in both places. MANdARAX •
XAЯAbИAM 22:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
I already did, I said I preferred ALT2b.
Partofthemachine (
talk) 21:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I missed that, my apologies. This is ready for a full review.
Narutolovehinata5 (
talk ·
contributions) 23:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
New enough, long enough. ALT2b short enough and sourced (as is every paragraph). No neutrality problems found, no copyright problems found, no maintenance templates found. QPQ unnecessary and image properly licensed. Good to go.--Launchballer 16:07, 27 March 2023 (UTC)