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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 11:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Baldwin–Reynolds House

5x expanded by Pbritti (talk). Self-nominated at 16:12, 21 November 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Baldwin-Reynolds House; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: new enough, long enough, well-sourced, hook interesting enough and cited. Looks good to me =) Broc (talk) 13:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but nominating an article 16 days after it is moved into mainspace is way too late. Schwede66 09:49, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Schwede66: The article was not nominated as new to mainspace, but based on my 5x expansion about 2.5 weeks after it became an article. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
My apologies; you are absolutely correct. That's a 5-times expansion from 14 to 22 November (and nobody is going to fuss about this being 8 days instead of 7). Good to go. Schwede66 18:54, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
5x expansion was Nov 20—21, for recording purposes. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:08, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I've fixed, if someone would like to check and repromote. Valereee (talk) 13:26, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Valereee: Weirdly, reading WP:DYK5X, your helpful and kind removal of the offending information appears to have made it far easier for the article to have cleared the expansion bar. Hadn't even considered that. Thanks for taking the time to improve the article. Your help improved the article while I was dealing with a stressful work week and allowed me to come back to this article with renewed hopes for its chance at running at DYK. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Lede suitably paraphrased, and Earwig provides no further cause for concern. Good to go.--Launchballer 16:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)