Template:Did you know nominations/Rusher's Patent Types
- 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 Capsulecap (talk) 18:49, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Rusher's Patent Types
- ... that Philip Rusher patented a paper-saving typeface with no descenders in 1802, but only a few books ever used it? Sources: "Specification of the Patent granted to Philip Rusher...dated May 20, 1802" (Repertory of Arts), "He proposed to save space, and thereby paper, by eliminating descenders", Johnston, "John Cheney printed Rasselas in that type in 1804, and, probably, The Deserted Village soon after; in 1817 Philip Rusher used it to print a pamphlet, and finally in 1852 John Golby Rusher used the type for a book on bee-keeping." (Victoria History, digitisation and Google Books scan, snippet view available)
- ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- Reviewed: Lake Letsie
- Comment: Created 11 August. I originally wrote a few sentences into the descender article but quickly spun it out into a separate article. QPQ TBD.
Created by Blythwood (talk). Self-nominated at 08:05, 12 August 2021 (UTC).
Fascinating article. I'm sad that it has no image of the text. Anyway, new enough, long enough, and well sourced. The hook was obviously interesting enough to get me to click, within rules, and well sourced. Earwig found only quotations from Smashing, properly marked as quotations. This would be good to go if only you had done the QPQ (and if I had noticed it was missing the QPQ before starting the rest of the review, I would probably have refused to do it — I think QPQs should be done before linking the nomination to the nominations page, not after waiting for some other sap to get around to doing their QPQs first). —David Eppstein (talk) 00:19, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
- David Eppstein, thanks for the review. I'm sorry that it's taken me a bit longer than I hoped to get a good QPQ review done.
Will ping you when that's complete. I've added in images, though.QPQ added and illustrations put in place. Blythwood (talk) 18:53, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
QPQ done, good to go. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
