A fact from Robert Quackenbush appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 July 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Robert Quackenbush wrote the Henry the Duck books to ease any taunting his son might receive because of his surname?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Children's literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Children's literature 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.Children's literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Children's literatureTemplate:WikiProject Children's literaturechildren and young adult literature articles
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.
... that Robert Quackenbush wrote the Henry the Duck books to ease any taunting his son would receive because of his surname? Source: The New York Times
ALT1:... that after Robert Quackenbush dedicated the Henry the Duck books to his son, "nobody made fun of him and his last name"? Source: The New York Times
Hi Bloom6132, review follows: by my count this is just over a 5x expansion (4650 characters from 919); article is well written and cited inline throughout to reliable sources; I don't have access to the NYT but I checked against the Publisher's World article, there are some similarities but largely unavoidable (names of organisations, common phrasing etc), I think, and nothing infringing on copyright; hook facts are mentioned in the article, AGF on sourcing from the NYT; a QPQ has been carried out. Looks good to me - Dumelow (talk) 09:45, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bloom6132, review follows: by my count this is just over a 5x expansion (4650 characters from 919); article is well written and cited inline throughout to reliable sources; I don't have access to the NYT but I checked against the Publisher's World article, there are some similarities but largely unavoidable (names of organisations, common phrasing etc), I think, and nothing infringing on copyright; hook facts are mentioned in the article, AGF on sourcing from the NYT; a QPQ has been carried out. Looks good to me - Dumelow (talk) 09:45, 22 June 2021 (UTC)