- 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 SL93 (talk) 20:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Annie Rothwell
- ... that Annie Rothwell was anointed the "supreme artist" of "Canadian martial poetesses" by a contemporary critic? "Of these later Canadian martial poetesses the supreme artist was Mrs. Annie Rothwell-Christie ...".
- ALT1:... that a poem by Annie Rothwell was read to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Queen's University? "This service was brought to a close by the reading of the following ode, also composed for the occasion by Mrs. Annie Rothwell ..."
ALT2 (with many thanks to @Eostrix for the suggestion): ... that Annie Rothwell was a renowned Canadian war poet? 1 (Edwin Arnold); 2; 3
- Reviewed: I believe I am exempt, as I don't currently have a DYK.
- Comment: The quoted language in alt1 is so comically sexist and archaic that I thought readers would find it funny, but I completely understand if reviewers think it's inappropriate. Alt1 is intended to be more neutral.
Moved to mainspace by AleatoryPonderings (talk). Self-nominated at 15:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC).
New article of sufficient length, nominated promptly, and the article is within policy. I favor ALT1 - the one mentioning Queen's University. The first two hooks have suitable references. The third would need substantiation which is not itself synthesis within the article. I have struck through ALT2 for this reason alone, and if the issue is fixed, I would also consider that one. I think the editor is exempt from QPQ, but they have made quite a few nominations of late - I didn't find a convenient way to identify whether 5 have been accepted. -- ke4roh (talk) 18:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Ke4roh: thanks for the review! Let's just go with Alt1, since I agree "renowned" is a bit questionable. By my count, I have 1 DYK, 2 in the queue, and 2 more approved, so I'm at 5. If I understand the policy right, if I have 5 or fewer credits I don't need a QPQ?
I've done three reviews so far: Milton (electoral district), 1942 Betteshanger miners' strike, and Ann Smith, so feel free to pick one of those if you think it'd be reasonable to require a QPQ here.AleatoryPonderings (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- @AleatoryPonderings: Leave this one as-is without a QPQ, and for subsequent nominations, submit each of those on a specific nomination exactly once. Thanks! -- ke4roh (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- Makes sense—thanks! Struck through the ones listed above to remove any vagueness. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 19:51, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Ke4roh: thanks for the review! Let's just go with Alt1, since I agree "renowned" is a bit questionable. By my count, I have 1 DYK, 2 in the queue, and 2 more approved, so I'm at 5. If I understand the policy right, if I have 5 or fewer credits I don't need a QPQ?
