Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Bancroft Shed

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Ashwin147 (talk) 17:52, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Bancroft Shed

[edit]
(
)

Created by ClemRutter (talk). Nominated by Pigsonthewing (talk) at 14:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC).

  • I have had an initial look at this article and DYK suggestion and have the following comments/queries:
  1. As you are using "kissing" in the proposed hook, the expression ought to be defined, either in the article or in a separate article. At present Kissing shuttle is a redlink. Incidentally, if a separate article is to be written, it ought to be in the singular.
  2. There are several other redlinks, especially in the "Equipment" paragraph, which detract from the article. A few stub articles to briefly explain the terminology would make this section easier to understand.
  3. The whole article could do with a copy edit. For example, there are several words which start in Upper case but ought to be in lower case (e.g. Drawing-in frame, Self-threading shuttles, One weaver}
  4. Numbers under ten should generally be spelled out while numbers 11 and over should be written as numbers.
  5. Several sections/paragraphs are entirely unreferenced.
  6. While it is not relevant to DYK, there appears to be a typo in the plan included in the article. This is headed "INSURNCE PLAN".

Once you have dealt with these points, I will review the article again. Cheers. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:39, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  1. The plural terms are already linked to singular articles. Are red links a block to DYK? I would have thought they're a good inducement to turn readers into contributors.
  2. Ditto.
  3. I've fixed what I can. I'm not clear why you didn't?
  4. Ditto.
  5. I trust that the original author can oblige.
  6. I can see no such phrase.

Thanks, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

  1. is now resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:22, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment only - there is nothing wrong with having redlinks in an article. Schwede66 06:08, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I agree, but was making a suggestion as to how the hook, in particular, and the article as a whole could be improved, since when "Kissing the shuttle" has been created. Unfortunately, there are still large sections of the article unreferenced so, until that is attended to, the hook cannot go any further. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:43, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I have added refs- I still feel that they rely too heavily on one source. Alternative sources usually link back to this author-one can't win
Redlinks covered by new stubs
Capitalisation left - A different set of style conventions apply here in the camp than in the MoS- best sorted by someone further from the Primary Sources. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for adding the missing references. I have linked "kissing" in the hook, which is now good to go. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:04, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Bancroft_Shed&oldid=880771172"