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) 17:09, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Overall: I think the paraphrasing is okay, but I have 1 question. Was it 1.5 stories, like the article says, or 2, like the source? Otherwise its good to go. DannyS712 (talk) 01:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
The National Register of Historic Places nomination, with a more professional analysis by an architectural historian, calls it 1.5 stories. I think Historic Buildings of Washington County simply doesn't observe the distinction. Kim Post (talk) 07:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
@Kim Post: thanks. Just wondering. its a nice article, good to go --DannyS712 (talk) 17:20, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
@DannyS712: How about ALT2 as a more "hooky" hook? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: Yeah but reading alt2, I have no idea what this is supposed to mean... maybe something about they draining the entire cellar? --DannyS712 (talk) 07:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: Well it's an interesting incident, and I was thinking about the quirky spot. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:17, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: If you want to propose alt2 (or 3, 4, etc) that is more "hooky," and @Kim Post: is okay with the hooks, I'll take a look at them tomorrow. --DannyS712 (talk) 07:23, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: I'm open to suggestions, but ALT2 doesn't seem like an improvement to me, either—it's not quirky because it explains exactly what happened. (And on reconsideration I think "Mormon Church" is more recognizable than "LDS Church".) You might render this more mysteriously as:
@Kim Post: Where is this nomination holding? It's been over 2 weeks since the last post. Yoninah (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah: The nomination has been approved since December 30. In my view, alternate hook suggestions from latecomers should not hold up a nomination when the approved hook meets all the requirements; please be bold in promoting them. Kim Post (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
@Kim Post: OK, but I honestly don't think ALT0 or ALT1 are hooky. Yoninah (talk) 21:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
@Yoninah: Then how about ALT3: ... that Thomas Forsyth stocked his cellar with wine until his wife cut loose and drained it all?
Much better, thanks. Perhaps pipe the link to his cellar? @DannyS712: could you review ALT3 please? Yoninah (talk) 21:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Changed as you suggested. Kim Post (talk) 21:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Sure, all3 passes: --DannyS712 (talk) 02:01, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
I think the paraphrasing is okay, but I have 1 question. Was it 1.5 stories, like the article says, or 2, like the source? Otherwise its good to go. DannyS712 (talk) 01:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
@Kim Post: Where is this nomination holding? It's been over 2 weeks since the last post. Yoninah (talk) 19:57, 17 February 2019 (UTC)