Template:Did you know nominations/Barbaroux
The following is an archived discussion of Barbaroux's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know
(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.
The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 00:40, 24 March 2013 (UTC).
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Barbaroux
[edit]- ... that the Provençal wine grape Barbaroux and the Barbarossa grown in Liguria and Piedmont were once thought to be the same grape until DNA testing showed otherwise?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Racketeer (novel)
- Comment: 5x expansion for Barbaroux. New article creation from redirect for Barbarossa (grape). Main ref is offline text however I did add an online link to a pdf of the DNA study itself with the hook verification found at the bottom of page 7 of that source.
Created/expanded by Agne27 (talk). Self nominated at 17:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC).
OK for hook and articles. Date, size and expansion fine. Hook fact is cited and verified in online reference. For the image, the license template says, that a United States public domain tag (which is missing) is needed to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. I am not quite sure how this affects dyk images. Oceanh (talk) 16:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)One review is supplied, while two are needed. According to recently modified dyk rules, for a two-article hook, it is expected to review one article for each article in the hook. Oceanh (talk) 08:25, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
- Simple fix. Just removed the bolding from Barbarossa (grape) to make it a one-article hook and the pictured so it can be promoted without the image. AgneCheese/Wine 16:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
- Agne27, I've seen you doing a number of reviews. If you don't have any extras, we can certainly hold this for a few days for you to do another review to cover the Barbarossa. It seems a shame not to have the article get the attention it deserves, especially as it's the new one here. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- I honestly don't care about getting two DYK credits (I rarely do multiple hooks). We can bold Barbarossa instead of Barbaroux. I'm fine either way. I tend to take my time with reviews and would rather spend that doing a review for a new hook. AgneCheese/Wine 20:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
It's entirely up to you. I'm fine to go with Barbaroux as you indicated, and I've removed Barbarossa from the nomination above, including the specific credits for it, given that there's only one QPQ. Approval tick per Oceanh's original review; I've removed the image from the nomination due to the image licensing issues mentioned above. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:45, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- I honestly don't care about getting two DYK credits (I rarely do multiple hooks). We can bold Barbarossa instead of Barbaroux. I'm fine either way. I tend to take my time with reviews and would rather spend that doing a review for a new hook. AgneCheese/Wine 20:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- Agne27, I've seen you doing a number of reviews. If you don't have any extras, we can certainly hold this for a few days for you to do another review to cover the Barbarossa. It seems a shame not to have the article get the attention it deserves, especially as it's the new one here. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- Simple fix. Just removed the bolding from Barbarossa (grape) to make it a one-article hook and the pictured so it can be promoted without the image. AgneCheese/Wine 16:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
