Template:Did you know nominations/Freies Volk
- 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 Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:31, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Freies Volk
[edit]- ... that after the ban on the Communist Party of Germany in 1956, its main organ Freies Volk continued to be published illegally?
Created by Soman (talk). Self nominated at 03:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC).
Both the inline citations in the article relating to this sentence are found in Google Books, and moreover, they are in German. Unfortunately enough, I am not a German and this hook cannot be verified. Moreover, the article just barely passes the criteria at 1579 characters. Try to increase the length. It has not been expanded 5x since creation.Please fix the errors and provide some reliable third party English source other than German language. Anyways, good QPQ. EhthicallyYours! 08:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
- The following has been checked in this review by Maile
- QPQ done by Soman
- Article created by Soman on November 30, 2013 and has 1,579 characters of readable prose
- External links tool on this template shows No issues
- Disambig tool on this template shows no issues
- Hook length is 125 characters, well below the-200 character limit.
- Unsure of hook sourcing, and need a review editor who understands German. Although the hook refers to the next-to-the-last sentence in the article, the two references at the end of the sentence point to two Google books wherein my searches therein do not seem to produce results that tells me they verify the hook.
- Although every paragraph is sourced, much of it is Google books, same as the hook, and sometimes ony pulls up a view of the book cover..
- Copyvio check tool would not be useful on this specific article for all the reasons mentioned Here Requires a source-by-source spot check via Duplication Detector.
Bottom line, Soman, this looks like an interesting article and meets the date and length requirement. Expansion of this article not required to pass DYK. Because of the sourcing, I believe this nomination would be best served if completed and passed by one of the DYK reviewers fluent in the German language. Good luck. — Maile (talk) 17:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
- In regards to the hook, 2 out 3 references are in English. --Soman (talk) 14:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
This is precisely the reason we have a "DYKtickAGF" option. We do not require that the nomination be reviewed by someone who speaks the language in question, and we permit citations to print sources. If you're citing an online copy of a printed book, the link to the online copy is purely a convenience link, and the citation would be just as valid if you didn't provide that link. Nothing in our DYK policies or our common practise requires anything more than what Maile66 has already done. Nyttend (talk) 03:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Nyttend, the only reason I requested a German language reviewer, is because what was happening on the talk page at that time made me jittery of using the AGF re non-English language sourced articles. The original (fairly new) reviewer above asked me to have a look at this, which I did as a favor. Given the climate at that time on the DYK talk page, I did not want this nom to suffer the same. I wanted to give this nomination its best chance without later being pulled because of someone questioning on the basis of language.— Maile (talk) 13:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
