Template:Did you know nominations/Historia narodu polskiego
- 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 SL93 (talk) 01:50, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Historia narodu polskiego
- ... that Historia narodu polskiego, the first modern history of Poland, was never finished, but was highly influential on the emerging Polish historiography? Source: see 1:26, 33 for influential, unfinished is self-evident and also referenced in text
Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 11:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC).
- I will undertake this review. Cavalryman (talk) 00:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Article is new enough and long enough.
I assess all of the article’s sources to be reliable and the article to written from a neutral POV. The article cites John D. Stanley quite extensively, I have read pages 23–27 which were available in the google books preview and see no plagiarism or close paraphrasing, and so I AGF with the other pages. Earwig shows no match whatsoever. It would be better to see another source cited for the basic information and Stanley for the detail as much of the basic subject matter is verifiable (example tertiary source). I cannot read the other two cited sources but AGF.
Hook is interesting and cited to Stanley.
Nice article which I enjoyed reading, thanks Piotrus Cavalryman (talk) 02:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)