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) 21:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Overall: Article is new enough and long enough, it is generally well-sourced and is plagiarism free. A QPQ is done. Image is clear, and free to use. The hook is cited and is interesting, and is sourced, although the signandsite web page is a copy of text from Süddeutsche Zeitung on 29 November, 2006 - so perhaps i could/should be replaced with the original source? For the timebeing the Guardian article is still a good source. It's really interesting, thanks for the effort! Lajmmoore (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
good point, Lajmmoore. i had noticed that too, but had been unable to find the same text on süddeutsche zeitung's site, so i had figured that, if it was available online, it was probably only available in german. to conform with wp:rsue, i had figured that using the signandsight source may be preferred over using the original article if it was in german. following your comment, i tried looking a little harder, and eventually realized that a search of the site for some of the relevant proper names (which would appear the same in either an english or a german article) might turn up something. this google search returned one hit for an article from 2010, which doesn't cover quite the same material.personally, i think the signandsight source is more appropriate than the 2010 article in this instance, though please let me know if you think otherwise, or have found any other articles that may serve as a better source. in any case, my more recent search efforts turned up additional articles that i may end up working into the article on von gerkan, so thanks for the suggestion! dying (talk) 06:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for looking dying - I'm totally happy with that explanation Lajmmoore (talk) 11:49, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Article is new enough and long enough, it is generally well-sourced and is plagiarism free. A QPQ is done. Image is clear, and free to use. The hook is cited and is interesting, and is sourced, although the signandsite web page is a copy of text from Süddeutsche Zeitung on 29 November, 2006 - so perhaps i could/should be replaced with the original source? For the timebeing the Guardian article is still a good source. It's really interesting, thanks for the effort! Lajmmoore (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2022 (UTC)