Template:Did you know nominations/Egg-and-spoon race

The following discussion 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 PumpkinSky talk 00:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Egg-and-spoon race[edit]

(

)

... that heptathlete Denise Lewis attributes her gold medal-winning ambition to victory as a child in the egg-and-spoon race (pictured)?

Reviewed: Kinal
Comment: x5 expansion; for the BST evening slot on 27 July please

Created/expanded by Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk). Self nom at 18:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm quite pleasantly surprised with the research that seems to have gone into this article. History, rules, and records are relatively obvious choices, but the prohibition section is beautiful. Length of the expansion, timeframe of expansion, and references all good. The only minor issue is the placement of information on Ms. Lewis, within the article itself. While she set a British and Commonwealth record, for points, it's still a little out of the left field there. It would be out of place in history, but perhaps best there. Perhaps. But otherwise, wonderful contribution. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, and good to have the the Canada ref - would be nice to chart the global progress! Re the placement issue, I quite agree that this sentence is a little out on its own and the "records" link is somewhat tenuous; however, I don't think it belongs to the history section, and also think it would be a shame simply to remove it - which would then leave the assorted records at the end, which kind of miss the whole point; could rearrange, moving prohibition to the end, but that's not nearly so germane/uplifting, and while this concern may not be entirely "encyclopedic", perhaps a small concession might be granted in consideration of the subject matter? I certainly wouldn't revert were anyone to change things around, but in the end perhaps best as is? Over to you... Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

QPQ done. Article is neutral enough. Hook properly formatted. Article is fully supported by inline citations. Image found in article. Images in article have acceptable copyrights. Hooked fact found in article and supported by sources. New enough at time of nomination. Good to go. --LauraHale (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)