Template:Did you know nominations/Walter Buckler

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:50, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Walter Buckler[edit]

(
)

Created/expanded by NinaGreen (talk). Self nom at 01:58, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Amazing job, Nina! I'd say that it's good to go since it meets all of the criteria for a DYK? nomination. Futurist110 (talk) 05:32, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Given that there are well over a dozen bare references, which is against DYK rules, this clearly does not meet all DYK criteria. Nina, please let us know when you have fixed all of the bare references (basically anything that's an http link). Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:27, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm still on a steep learning curve. I didn't know about bare references, and I'm not sure how to fix them, although I'm quite willing to do so. Can you give me an example of the way in which they should be fixed? Thanks. NinaGreen (talk) 06:41, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
  • The bare references are all to British History Online, and are thus unlikely to become dead links in the future, which I gather is the principal objection to bare references. In addition, most of the bare references are to volumes of the Letters and Papers of Henry VIII, and in some cases there are two bare references to the same volume, but different urls for those two references because of the way British History Online has broken up each volume of the L&P into many different web pages. All in all, I'm wondering whether it might not be the lesser of two evils to leave the bare references as is, and would appreciate your thoughts on that. I try to avoid bare references in my editing, but with links to British History Online, perhaps bare references might be the better option? NinaGreen (talk) 19:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Nina, unfortunately bare refs aren't an option; see WP:DYKSG#D3 about bare URLs for refs. The Reflinks tool mentioned there is quite useful, and I've just run it on your reference list, which fixed the bulk of them. It would be nice if you added an access date—Reflinks can't know when you found the site and got the data—but not required for DYK. Unfortunately, the tool does not recognize bare URLs when they're a second part of a ref, but now you have a useful template to work with for the few that remain. (A quick-and-dirty way that might let you use Reflinks even on these: temporarily separate the joint refs into two separate refs, run Reflinks to get the proper title for the bare-URL-only ref, and then join them back up.) BlueMoonset (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks very much for the helpful explanation, and for fixing the bulk of the bare urls with Reflinks. I fixed the remaining ones except for the Trove Digitized Newspaper article on which Reflinks wouldn't work, and moved the latter to the External links section. I've never used Reflinks before, and am glad to find out how to use it as it will come in very handy in the future. NinaGreen (talk) 02:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Reference updates look good. Thanks. Would like a re-review by another reviewer to confirm the article is ready for approval, since the first review missed a basic DYK requirement. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:21, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay, I've had a go with this interesting article - I hope the very minor changes I made are acceptable and that I haven't broken anything?
  • Article is now 6464 readable prose characters, it was 213 before expansion started on 1 February, so x30, well over x5 requirement; I've re-assessed as 'start' class; it's neutral and refs look fine; I'm not managing to get earwig to work today but I did a random check on some online refs and didn't find copy vio issues; Each para has inline citations - minor question, under 'Marriage' is there a ref for final sentence, i.e. She is said to have died in 1582.?
  • QPQ done;
  • Hook is correctly formatted, fits length criteria and was interesting enough to draw my attention;
  • I copied the refs for the hook into the lead, as that is where it is stated in one sentence rather than being in two different paragraphs (hope that's okay)
  • I've checked and the first part of hook is supported by online ref but AGF on second offline ref.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Walter_Buckler&oldid=829339397"