Template:Did you know nominations/Mondelez v AMWU
- 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 00:08, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Mondelez v AMWU
- ... that a dispute over paid sick leave at a chocolate factory ended up before the High Court of Australia in Mondelez v AMWU? Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-13/cadbury-workers-leave-decision-high-court/12553308
- ALT1: ... that two chocolate factory workers won a dispute over sick leave with their employer, only for it to be overturned by the High Court of Australia in Mondelez v AMWU? Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-13/cadbury-workers-leave-decision-high-court/12553308
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Adam Exner
- Comment: This article was created in draft last year however was only finished and moved from draftspace to mainspace today, so per WP:DYKNEW it still meets the criteria for newness.
- I remain very open to suggested tweaks (or obliterations) of my hook, I would love to improve it where possible
Moved to mainspace by MaxnaCarta (talk). Self-nominated at 05:00, 7 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mondelez v AMWU; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
A solid article, new enough (I've had drafts in progress for longer) and certainly long enough, without evident eligiblity ruleouts. QPQ done. The hooks are sort of a distillation of the article, so it doesn't have the easy "point at a sentence" eligibility check of many DYK hooks, but it's cited in the article the way you'd expect such a hook to be, verifiable to reliable sources. I'd tweak "Cadbury factory" to "chocolate factory", though, which is a little more obvious and avoids focusing too much on brand names. Vaticidalprophet 11:37, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Vaticidalprophet:. Should be fine now. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, wasn't clear enough -- my bad :) I meant saying that in the hooks, rather than the article. Vaticidalprophet 15:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- No worries @Vaticidalprophet:, all done — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:45, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, wasn't clear enough -- my bad :) I meant saying that in the hooks, rather than the article. Vaticidalprophet 15:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Vaticidalprophet:. Should be fine now. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:26, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
