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 Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 06:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Glenn Pool Oil Reserve

Example of an early 20th century oil drilling derrick showing an oil strike

• ... that oil production from the Glenn Pool Oil Reserve helped Oklahoma to produce not just more oil than any other US state, but of any country in the world? History of the Oil Boom – Ida E. Glenn Discovery Glenn Pool Field
  • ALT1:... that the Oklahoma oil boom set off by the discovery of the Glenn Pool Oil Reserve created more wealth for speculators than the California Gold Rush and Colorado Silver Rush combined? History of the Oil Boom – Ida E. Glenn Discovery (197 characters w/o citation)
  • ALT2:... that huge lakes of oil created following the discovery of Oklahoma's Glenn Pool Oil Reserve would sometimes catch fire when struck by lightning? History of the Oil Boom – Glenn Fact Sheet; website; Glen Pool Oil Field; accessed December 26, 2019 and Glenn Pool Discovery led Oil Boom; Zizzo, David; webpage; November 22, 2004; The Oklahoman online; accessed December, 2019 (160 characters w/o citation)
  • ALT3:... that following the first oil strike of the Glenn Pool Oil Reserve, many Creek Indian landowners in Oklahoma became millionaires? Gilcrease, William Thomas (1890 - 1962); Self, Burl E.; Encyclopedia of Oklahoma History and Culture; Oklahoma Historical Society online; retrieved December 26, 2019 (145 characters)

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Abraham H. Albertson

Created by GenQuest ( talk). Self-nominated at 13:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC).

The article Glenn Pool Oil Reserve is new enough, long enough (over 1500 characters) and meets Wikipedia policies.

The first four hooks are factual and well within the character limit, but only if the in-line citation is not counted. This reviewer has added ALT4, which specifically identifies the well driller and his link to a world renowned local museum. The reviewer believes may attract more potential readers to the main article and therefore is a stronger hook. ** ALT4:... that Thomas Gilcrease, a part-Creek multi-millionaire who founded the Gilcrease Museum, made much of his wealth from producing oil in the Glenn Pool Oil Reserve? (169 characters)

I recommend uploading this DYK

Reviewer: Bruin2 ( talk) 21:57, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

• Bruin2, thanks for the review. For future reference, the icon should only be used once to conclude the review, and it should be the icon template (available above the edit window) rather than a link to the icon image. So I only converted the last of your links. Also, when you propose a hook of your own, you cannot also approve it; it needs to be checked by someone else. (Note that in counting a hook, only "that" through the final "?" are counted, and then only the final version as displayed, not the various bolding and wikilinking characters that don't display. ALT1 counts as 182 characters, not 197.)

Reviewer needed to check ALT4, as it was proposed by the prior reviewer and cannot be approved by them. BlueMoonset ( talk) 19:24, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

ALT4 is not really that interesting of the hook because it's reliant on a name that isn't really well-known to readers. On the other hand, ALT2 and ALT3 are far more eye-catching and hooky. Unfortunately, ALT3 is only mentioned in the lede and does not appear to have a citation, so the rest of the review is on hold pending that issue being addressed. This will be good to go with either ALT2 or ALT3 once the referencing concern has been solved. Narutolovehinata5 ^{t c csd new} 02:21, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

@ BlueMoonset: & @ Narutolovehinata5: In regards to ALT 3, I believe this is adequately addressed in the second and third sentences (and references 5 & 7) under the sub-chapter "Consequences." Please let me know if this is not the case. I am good with either ALT 2 or ALT 3 being used—your choice. Thanks for your time. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 00:06, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I've checked the relevant sentences and it specifically only mentions the Creek Nation but not Native Americans in general. In this case, it might be a better idea to specifically mention the Creek Nation in ALT3 instead of the more general term. I've also made a slight change to ALT2, removing the comma as it didn't sound right with it. Narutolovehinata5 ^{t c csd new} 01:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Modified ALT3 per @ Narutolovehinata5: GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 13:10, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I think we should be good to go with ALT2. I really like ALT3 as well, but the source provided only mentions that the Creek Indians were "paid millions" which is not exactly the same as "became millionaires"; if a new hook that reflects the source is suggested, I would approve such a version. Rest of the review per Bruin2; also adding that a QPQ has been provided. Narutolovehinata5 ^{t c csd new} 00:39, 31 January 2020 (UTC)