Template:Did you know nominations/Jelena Balšić, Gorički zbornik
The following is an archived discussion of Jelena Balšić's and Gorički zbornik'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 1st nominated article's (talk) page, the 2nd nominated article's (talk) page, or the DYK WikiProject's (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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Jelena Balšić, Gorički zbornik
[edit]( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links: )
- ... that one part of the Gorički zbornik, a Serbian medieval manuscript collection, was written by Jelena Balšić in period between 1441 and 1442?
- Reviewed: John Hemmingham and William Vane, 2nd Viscount Vane
Created/expanded by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nom at 13:17, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
I found the article on the list of "stalled" nominations and thought I should give it a try - I know what it is like to wait for ages, having nominated a (I dare say) very interesting but apparently still insufficiently reviewed article on 12 January (Template:Did you know nominations/Frances Vane, Viscountess Vane). Anyway, the article on the manuscript was sufficiently expanded between September and 14 January. The article on Duchess Jelena was created only two days prior to the nomination and is obviously long enough. I am amazed that Wikipedia did not have an article on the Duchess before! Both articles meet all the requirements, as does the hook. It will make a great addition to the DYK section. Surtsicna (talk) 12:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)- ALT1: ... that the first part of the Gorički zbornik contains correspondence between Duchess Jelena and her spiritual adviser, but that only one epistle is preserved today?
- I think the alternative hook would be more attractive, but there is nothing wrong with the original one either. Surtsicna (talk) 13:05, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
