The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Allen3 ^talk 22:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• ... that professional wrestler Bob Starr was called to work for World Championship Wrestling but hung up because an ear injury prevented him from knowing who had called?

• Reviewed: n/a - not self nomination
• Comment: Information to verify source is at 22:50 on video in reference

Created/expanded by 72.74.216.210 (talk). Nominated by GaryColemanFan (talk) at 05:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

• Not sure if a internet radio show interview is a reliable enough source for a DYK nomination.--Hirolovesswords (talk) 05:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

• The fact isn't controversial, and the source is an audio interview with Starr himself. If anyone doubts that Starr said this, they can listen to him say this. Could you please explain why this would not be considered reliable? GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:29, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

• This hook is currently under consideration to be merged with this other one for the main page appearance. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:27, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

• Didn't happen. This will run separately if it runs. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:18, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

• This is a great example of why quid pro quo is a terrible idea for DYK. People will give minimal feedback when reviewing so that their hook can be reviewed. In terms of actually being able to discuss whether a hook meets the requirements, however, it's hit or miss. Why stick around for a potentially lengthy discussion when you've already got what you wanted? In the past, volunteers were open to back-and-forth discussions because they were actually volunteers, not forced volunteers. It's time to stop trying to fix something that wasn't broken a year ago but is almost unsalvageable at this point. The bottom line on this nomination is that there is clear evidence that Starr made this uncontroversial statement. Can this meet the requirements for DYK? GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

• I hate it when people do that. As this review hasn't gone anywhere...

Hook: Not seeing the reference at all now. It's interesting, so I'd hate if we have to change it.

Article: Long enough, new enough. One paragraph unreferenced, and the information about the knee injury should probably be cited too. Paraphrasing checks (1, 2, 3) look okay.

Summary: Referencing issues. Hook fact, one paragraph, and one fact. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I've been sick all week, but I should be able to get to this in the next couple of days. GaryColemanFan (talk) 13:17, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I have added a reference to that paragraph and updated the url for the reference of the hook. I can't find a reference for the knee injury, but I don't think it is controversial enough to really be challenged. Please let me know if more is needed. GaryColemanFan (talk) 04:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

• Looks good. AGF on offline and bandwidth-intensive sources. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)