Template:Did you know nominations/Derby Black Friary
- 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 PumpkinSky talk 20:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Derby Black Friary
[edit]- ... that in 1344 Derby Black Friary was ransacked by a group of over 40 men, who stole £60 worth of goods?
5x expanded by Rushton2010 (talk). Self nominated at 00:54, 2 May 2013 (UTC).
- Article had its prose portion expanded at least fivefold
- Long enough – the prose portion is at least 1500 characters
- Within policy – meets core policies and guidelines, is neutral, cites sources.
- The toolserver was down when I tried to check for close paraphrasing issues, copyvios and plagiarism but most of the source is declared as public domain anyway.
- Hook - verifiable to Ref 1 - but it could be made much punchier by making it shorter - remove the date and reshuffle could lead to "... Derby Black Friary was ransacked and goods worth £60 were stolen?" Personally, I think the attack/riot/ransacking is under-played in the article - the ref text was interesting.
- Other - nominator has not stated which DYK's they have reviewed; seem to have created quite a few DYKs themselves but it isn't clear on what they've reviewed for this nom.
To summarise, there are still some issues with the nomination. If these can be dealt with, I can try to complete the policy checks when the toolserver is back, but the article is good and the facts are verifiable. Wikiwayman (talk) 12:28, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
- Completed review for copy-vios etc - no significant issues. Wikiwayman (talk) 12:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
- I haven't reviewed anything as last time I did it caused more problems than it was worth. As it is not a requirement for those of us who don't have 5 DYK Credits, I haven't reviewed anything- I thought it unfair to the other nominators who may suffer issues because of it.
- I am happy with the alternative suggestion for the hook also. I don't know how to add the Alternative ones after you've submitted it, so if you know how to add it as an alternative, please do.
- Many Thanks Rushton2010 (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
OK; I've looked into your noms and accept your point. I'll leave any chopping of the hook to the DYK admins. Wikiwayman (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
