- 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) 17:37, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Willa Cather
- Reviewed: Exempt; only two previous nominations.
- Comment: Hopefully one of these hooks are interesting enough! All hooks cited inline in the article.
Improved to Good Article status by Urve (talk). Self-nominated at 13:05, 11 March 2021 (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
|
- Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
- Interesting:
|
Image eligibility:
Overall: Image not approved. Struck some hooks as not sufficiently unusual or interesting. Recommend ALT3a—giving the title of the book makes it more recognizable and interesting. (t · c) buidhe 12:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. I thought the Lewis hooks would be interesting because Lewis is a woman (and there is a new historical book about their relationship published). Hook 3a is my favorite - no worries about the image. Can strike the other hooks if that makes it easier for whoever promotes. Urve (talk) 15:48, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Neither of the hooks referring to the relationship mention the time period taking place. While it is more noteworthy for the early twentieth century, it would not be so noteworthy if Cather lived more recently. Even in the early nineteenth/twentieth century it was not uncommon for women to live together in "Boston marriage". (t · c) buidhe 06:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)