Talk:Project Happy Days

Project Happy Days has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 26, 2026.

Indonesia Low‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pornography Low‑importance

	Erotica and pornography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

United States: Government / History Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Low-importance).

Did you know nomination

Latest comment: 1 month ago4 comments3 people in discussion

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the CIA produced a pornographic film?

Source: *"Porno Movie on Sukarno Too?". Pacific Daily News. Agama Heights, Guam. 17 June 1975. p. 10.

- ALT1: ... that the CIA produced a pornographic film to undermine a president? Source: *"Porno Movie on Sukarno Too?". Pacific Daily News. Agama Heights, Guam. 17 June 1975. p. 10.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Risa Nakamura
- Comment: Honestly, probably wild enough for April Fools Day without any embellishment. Thoughts?

Created by Crisco 1492 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 831 past nominations.

— Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:09, 23 September 2026 (UTC).Reply

Sure, bet! This is so funny! Very ironic for a government to violate their own laws they police closely... Unsurprising 📝 🗣️💬 01:24, 23 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
- It's called "Project Happy Days" as well! (The government is "happy" to violate their own laws for their own sake? Imagine...) From a personal perspective, I agree this is wild enough for April Fools day without any embellishment.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was created on Sept 22, moved to mainspace on Sept 23 and nominated on Sept 23. QPQ done. No copyvio detected. Neutrally written and fully cited. Hook is very interesting & cited. Definitely suitable for April Fool's day (given how wild it is). I approve ALT0 (more succinct is better for this, in my opinion) — Chao Garden 🌱 ~ say hello 23:36, 23 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks muchly. Will move to the staging area for AF. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:39, 23 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

GA review

Latest comment: 7 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Passed all GA criteria--ActuallyElite (talk) 18:47, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Project Happy Days/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 21:45, 3 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: ActuallyElite (talk · contribs) 15:42, 26 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Looks like a very interesting topic, I'll be reviewing this soon.

To start, nominator has 99.6% authorship.

Earwig shows a 9.1% violation, but it looks like it just flagged book and article names so it should be fine.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, grammar, and understandability): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, lists, and tables):
Just a few small errors I fixed
It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
Chose 5 random sources for a spot check. 12, 14, 19, 31, 33.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Follows the major aspects and focused on the topic
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Has a neutral point of view
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Seems stable
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions and alt text):
Images are both in the public domain. Both images have good captions and alt text.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Really interesting article, and good job on writing it too. Seems like an easy pass for me!

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.