Template:Did you know nominations/Thinkwell Group
- 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 Alex ShihTalk 05:09, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Thinkwell Group[edit]
- ... that the Thinkwell Group helped create a Harry Potter studio tour and the US theme park?
- Reviewed: Mimana
Created/expanded by Casspsu14 (talk). Nominated by Matty.007 (talk) at 18:12, 31 July 2013 (UTC).
References should be cleaned up (there is a bare URL which should be fixed), and a bit more on the company's history would be nice (right now that's quite light). Otherwise looks decent. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:16, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Crisco 1492: which reference are you meaning? The only bare URL I can see is the link to their website. I actually, from a quick Google, found only a little information about their history, so thought that it is probably better to keep it where it is. Hoewver, I divided it into a 'Work' section, to shorten the sections a little. Thanks, Matty.007 14:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Right, that's the one. It needs publisher information etc. Does the company's web page have history on them? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:17, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Surprisingly, I couldn't find one, nor could I find one by Googling 'Thinkwell Group history', which surprised me a little. I think it may just need to be left out if information can't be found. Thanks, Matty.007 14:55, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- You're right. Odd. That fourth footnote needs to be fixed though before this can go anywhere. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Surprisingly, I couldn't find one, nor could I find one by Googling 'Thinkwell Group history', which surprised me a little. I think it may just need to be left out if information can't be found. Thanks, Matty.007 14:55, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Alright, good to go now. New enough, long enough. No image to check. Text looks okay. Referencing is acceptable. Article seems neutral to me, hook is too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
