- 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) 22:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
A stuffed cat claimed to be Crimean Tom
Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 20:25, 21 February 2018 (UTC).
-
| General: Article is new enough and long enough
|
|
|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
|
|
|
Overall: 
Image details says “may be” the cat. It's a fantastic story and interesting hook. Please clarify the image, which can be in the article with text saying "cat often assumed to be" but not confirmed to be the Crimean cat. The cat record shows it to have been bought later in a flee market. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- Well spotted. I have amended the article and caption above. I have added an alt if it is decided to run this without an image as it the fact that it was a cat is the interesting part - Dumelow (talk) 22:26, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Dumelow, "Well spotted"? The Commons page clearly states "may be" and the museum page is even more equivocal. The painting in the article has the comment "there is no evidence to substantiate any of these claims". Did you not see either of those? It's a nice story and I know it is a bit of fun but I don't see that we should really run it with a picture of a cat bought in a flee market 100 years after the event. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:14, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- I started the article based on the BBC article which states "After his death in 1856, he was stuffed and preserved and is a permanent part of the National Army Museum in London", no mention of any ambiguity there. I only brought in the NAM source when I realised the museum had a photo of the cat and contacted them to release it on a free license. But hey, whatever, run it with or without the image I think the caption makes it clear there is dispute over whether this is the actual cat - Dumelow (talk) 23:42, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- thanks @Philafrenzy: for helping @Dumelow: and the article. It's clear now. Keep image. Whispyhistory (talk) 06:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks Whispyhistory. Just a note that I still need to carry out a QPQ for this one. I will try to do so shortly - Dumelow (talk) 10:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
- QPQ now done at Template:Did you know nominations/Dead heat (racing) - Dumelow (talk) 10:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Image details says “may be” the cat. It's a fantastic story and interesting hook. Please clarify the image, which can be in the article with text saying "cat often assumed to be" but not confirmed to be the Crimean cat. The cat record shows it to have been bought later in a flee market. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC)