Template:Did you know nominations/Jean Castaing, Castaing machine

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 ceradon (talk • contribs) 03:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Jean Castaing, Castaing machine

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

... that the Castaing machine (pictured), a seventeenth-century device created by Jean Castaing, was capable of applying edge lettering to 20,000 coins daily?

Reviewed: Wilhelm Nikolaus Suksdorf, Suksdorfia violacea, Alfred Lindon
Comment: I worked on these two articles in my user space, and moved them to main space tonight. Thanks in advance to the reviewer!-RHM22 (talk) 07:09, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Created by RHM22 (talk). Self nominated at 07:05, 1 February 2015 (UTC).

Alright, going through the checklist: both check out as new enough, both are definitely long enough, and I don't think I see any policy issues. Hook is good, and I'll AGF on the foreign-language source (my French is embarrassingly poor). The QPQ checks out, as does the image. The only problem I can see is that the note on Castaing's biography seems like it should be sourced, although it probably is and I'm not seeing it. Other than that possible concern, this appears great. - A Texas Historian (Talk to me) 02:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, A Texas Historian, for your review! I'm not entirely clear on your meaning. Did you mean that the information regarding applying edge lettering to 20,000 coins should be in both articles? I don't believe that is necessary, but it's not specifically elucidated in the DYK rules, so I have added that to the Jean Castaing article.-RHM22 (talk) 02:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

My apologies for the ambiguity. I was referring to the note about Martin Masselin in the Jean Castaing article. - A Texas Historian (Talk to me) 02:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

A Texas Historian: Oh, I see what you mean! Sorry about that; I can be a bit thick at times. Anyway, I've fixed that now. I meant to add a reference there before, but it slipped my mind. Thanks again for your thorough review.-RHM22 (talk) 02:57, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

It's alright, I can be rather vague at times. These articles now appear to go beyond the DYK criteria. Nice work! - A Texas Historian (Talk to me) 03:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

@RHM22: you have to do two QPQs for two bolded links. That should allow it to be promoted. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 20:16, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that, ceradon; I thought I was meant to review a nomination containing two articles. I have added another review above. Thanks!-RHM22 (talk) 03:35, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

@RHM22: Very well. Closing and promoting to prep 4. Thanks, --ceradon (talk • contribs) 03:45, 16 February 2015 (UTC)