Template:Did you know nominations/Obelisk Commemorating Roger Barnston
- 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 Allen3 talk 16:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Obelisk Commemorating Roger Barnston[edit]
- ... that the four lions surrounding the Obelisk Commemorating Roger Barnston (pictured) have been described as either mourning or snoozing?
- Reviewed: Kielce Bus Station
Created by Peter I. Vardy (talk). Self nominated at 19:27, 8 January 2014 (UTC).
Date checks out, length OK, image OK. I have several points to make. (1) Redirect link to "listed building" in header needs correcting, but that is not important. I am confused about the references for the hook. (2) Reference 1 is placed next to the word "mourning" in the text, but the word does not occur in that citation. (3) It may be that both "mourning" and "snoozing" are quoted in reference 4, but that is not online for checking. To clarify things, please could you (a) move reference 1 to the end of the same sentence. Also, please could you (b) confirm here that both words, "mourning" and "snoozing," are quoted in reference 4, so that we can take it IGF. Thank you for your patience in this - it's a worthwhile article about a rather beautiful monument, so it's worth getting it right.Storye book (talk) 20:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks and apologies. My cock-up; I placed "name=nhl" in the wrong reference, so it was wrong throughout the article. I blame a virus infection, but that's no excuse. You will now be able to find "mourning" covered by Ref 2; "snoozing" is offline in Pevsner (Ref 4). So that's all corrected. The link via a redirect should not be a concern; I was "informed" while struggling with a FLC that this is what redirects are for - they get you there automatically and save typing. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:30, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. Re the redirect - although I agree with your informant from an editor's POV, you'll find that if in the future you enter an article for GA, you'll be asked to sort out all the redirects. I think this is a fair request because (I've been told) all the millions of redirects on WP do add to the load. I would add that people who program their own redirects are fully in control of where each link is going. So that's why I think it's worth drawing attention to redirects in nice articles.
Good to go. --Storye book (talk) 11:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
