Template:Did you know nominations/Admiral's House, Hampstead
Appearance
- 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 DannyS712 (talk) 00:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Admiral's House, Hampstead
- ... that no admiral has ever lived at Admiral's House, Hampstead (pictured)? Source: [1], https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qxfVUt5wJTUC]
- ALT1:... that John Constable produced many paintings of Admiral's House, Hampstead ( example pictured)? Source: [2], [3]
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/169th Street station (IND Queens Boulevard Line)
- Comment: This image could also be used for ALT0. I prefer Constable painting, as it's more interesting
Created by Joseph2302 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC).
- The article is new enough, long enough, with the hook facts cited inline. I am assuming good faith for ALT0's sources as they are offline. ALT0 is probably the better and more quirky hook of the two; the image is fine, but I think the article could really work in the quirky slot. A QPQ has been provided. There are only two questions I have before this is approved: is the house currently occupied? There appears to be no mention about if someone is living there at present, or what the building's current uses are. Secondly, the paragraph containing the hook fact is a bit confusing to read, particularly the part that goes
In the late 18th century, the house was mistaken as belonging to Admiral Barton, who was known for firing cannonballs from his Hampstead house.[1][5]:8 The problem arose because a print of Admiral's House was incorrectly entitled Admiral Barton’s Hampstead
. Even though the wording is meant to say the opposite, at first glance it made me think that "Hampstead house" and Admiral's House are the same building. Perhaps the wording could be revised to prevent confusion? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
- Narutolovehinata5 I've added some more history, which has added information up until the 1970s. Apart from a couple of planning disputes ([4], [5]) that I'm not going to add to the article, I cannot find any sources for the last 40 years. Although according to those sources, it looks like it's currently owned by some non-notable people. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:18, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- I think for the sake of completeness, it might still be a good idea to include a brief mention of that recent news (perhaps only a sentence or two at most). I also saw the Mary Poppins angle and wondered if hooks based on that could also work as alternative (granted, ALT0 would remain my preference, just that it might help to have multiple options). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Done, added the 2015 source, but not the 2019 Daily Mail source, as per WP:DAILYMAIL. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, I think we should be good to go now with ALT0. In case the image is to be used, it meets requirements and thus is also good to go. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:36, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- Done, added the 2015 source, but not the 2019 Daily Mail source, as per WP:DAILYMAIL. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- The article is new enough, long enough, with the hook facts cited inline. I am assuming good faith for ALT0's sources as they are offline. ALT0 is probably the better and more quirky hook of the two; the image is fine, but I think the article could really work in the quirky slot. A QPQ has been provided. There are only two questions I have before this is approved: is the house currently occupied? There appears to be no mention about if someone is living there at present, or what the building's current uses are. Secondly, the paragraph containing the hook fact is a bit confusing to read, particularly the part that goes