Template:Did you know nominations/Stanisława Leszczyńska
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 19:49, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Stanisława Leszczyńska
[edit]
- ... that a professional midwife Stanisława Leszczyńska (pictured) delivered 3,000 babies at the Auschwitz concentration camp during the Holocaust in occupied Poland?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ich hatte viel Bekümmernis, BWV 21
- Comment: 5x expansion from 449 characters (69 words) of readable prose, as of 14 April 2015, to 4185 characters (694 words) as of 22 June 2015. Thanks. Poeticbent talk 00:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
5x expanded by Poeticbent (talk). Self-nominated at 00:48, 23 June 2015 (UTC). Expansion began on 21 June 2015. Poeticbent talk 03:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
This should be GTG, although there are a few minor issues that ideally would be fixed. The article has been expanded enough to meet the criteria, and meets the baseline length requirement. It is free of copy-vios that I can find; the only duplications are at Wikipedia mirrors. It is largely neutral and well cited, but this is where I was not 100% happy; many of the sources are websites that don't throw up red flags, but are don't seem a priori reliable either. This is exacerbated by the fact that they are in Polish, making them harder to verify. I am only willing to pass this because the reliable sources back up the other ones. There was also an uncited sentence, which I removed. It could also use a more thorough copy-edit that the one I gave it. The hook is fine; interesting, short, etc. The image is supposedly PD in Poland, therefore acceptable; promoters call on using it. Oh, and Poeticbent, please put a little more effort into your QPQ next time; a two line review is not quite thorough enough. Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the QPQ review, User:Vanamonde93, much appreciated. WP:RS added. Foreign-language tick not necessary because books are in English. Btw, my own QPQ was fine; although promoted to WP:Good article I still improved on its sourcing.[1] Thanks, Poeticbent talk 00:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding the reference. In a sense you are correct, I cannot judge how much effort you put into your QPQ; what I have to go by is the text which you added to the nomination page. That, in itself, was insufficient, because it does not tell the reviewer that you have checked every one of the DYK criteria, which of course you need to do even if the article is a new GA. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
