Template:Did you know nominations/Tricana poveira

The following discussion 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 Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Tricana poveira

(

)

... that Tricana poveira are Portuguese girls, wearing folk costumes, known for a peculiar dressing style and way of walking?

Created/expanded by PedroPVZ (talk). Self nom at 11:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have to say that I don't understand a lot of the article. I wasn't even really able to discern whether this refers to a fixed group, a tradition, or more of a sub-culture. I'm not sure, maybe this just needs copyediting.--Carabinieri (talk) 18:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Even in Portuguese it is not easy to explain, and people often ask what tricana means.

It is a local (urban) girls dressing style (and the girls themselves) part of a local culture, a girl is called like that if she uses that type of clothing, of course, she must be from the city. the girl uses tricana poveira costume, thus the girl is a tricana poveira. So it is not a fixed group, it can be any local girl. --Pedro (talk) 19:05, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Article has been copy edited for clarity. -- Esemono (talk) 14:53, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Esemono. great work. --- Pedro (talk)

ALT1 ... that Tricana girls are Portuguese girls who used to dress like fisherwomen but walked like royalty?

I don't think the article is ready for DYK just yet, because it still needs some more copyediting. I want to help you with that. I've made a list of things that are unclear to me on the talk page.--Carabinieri (talk) 17:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Pedro has addressed all the ce feedback provided on the talk page. -- Esemono (talk) 10:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Needs a second look. -- Esemono (talk) 01:24, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm wondering if it's OK to pass a DYK article based on a single source...? Moswento (talk | contribs) 10:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

A single offline foreign language source, so we are relying on the AGF of the editor, and the accuracy of the translation, as well as the reliability and accuracy of the original source. I'm wondering if that's enough to keep the article at all. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 06:05, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

For obvious reasons the source is in Portuguese. Need to explain why? 1+1=2 and 2+1=3! Translation is well made. And You can always buy the book and use babelfish and other sites. It is as simple as that and far better than online sources, in Portuguese for the same 1+1=2 reason. Although I can get some online sources, but none is as good as this one.

This is not an obscure thing. There were even morning national tv shows dedicated to this, and there is also a cable TV report who did a good presentation of this, covering most of what it is said in the article. Unfortunately, wikipedia no longer accepts Youtube links. Dont know why, it can be useful for ethnographic studies. --Pedro (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not trying to be negative, and the reasons are as obvious as you state. I'm not saying that I don't believe that the information is accurate, because I do. I have no reason to believe that you would have fabricated any of this, that you could not translate properly, or that you would use an inaccurate book. My point is simply that this is a lot of faith in one source; accuracy of the original source, accuracy of the translation, accuracy of information presented. That is assuming that most people that visit English Wikipedia do not read Portuguese and do not have a copy that book handy. My point was simply that other sources should be found, any additional sources, to establish a baseline. Just some reliable source (preferably online) saying that this was a real thing, even if there is no more valuable information contained in that source. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 16:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

- I can literally not find another reliable source that can confirm the term Tricana poveira. At pt:Cultura da Póvoa de Varzim#Tricana Poveira (there is no PT article to match this) the only source is the same as this only source. That being said, I have found numerous unreliable and insignificant sources (Tricana poveira contests, blog posts, pictures of women in these outfits), and these can at least confirm that this is a real thing, even if it hasn't gained a lot of media/scholarly attention. Honestly, I don't know how many resources we would ever be able to find on regional Portuguese style. We do have one reliable source, so let's use that. This may get kicked back down later, but I'd say it's good to go with ALT1. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 07:41, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I've added some sources. But I'm trying to get some pics from the city hall and will try to upload them to commons after they reply to my email. I liked some, they show the diversity in the looks of women and their outfits. [1] a group [2] [3] [4] ---Pedro (talk) 12:40, 9 May 2012 (UTC)