A fact from Al-Rushati appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 April 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages
Latest comment: 8 months ago12 comments5 people in discussion
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.
Overall: @Srnec: The article was created on 11 March. It has a readable prose size of 1986 characters. Each paragraph has a reference. WP:EARWIG shows no copyright problems. The hook is interesting and supported by the quoted passage. QPQ was done.
By the way, it might be good to add a wikilink for the term "florilegium" in the lead since not all readers may not be aware of its meaning. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:51, 16 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
The QPQ check tool to the right counts only 14. I don't really trust the QPQ tool that much because it barely counts 40% of my own nominations. But If the nominator feels that they have done less than 20 noms this can go forward or they can do the double. This case is on the honor system.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Restoring original tick by Phlsph7; while I count 16 prior successful nominations, that is not 20, and this should not have been tagged for a second QPQ absent clear evidence that there were. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Srnec, thank you for your honesty in noting the earlier pre-QPQ DYKs. Regrettably, since this has already been reviewed, you cannot reuse Lemnos QPQ for some other nomination, so there's no point in withdrawing this nom (and it seems a shame not to have it go through). Perhaps another DYK editor would be willing to donate one of their extra QPQs to you, since you hadn't been aware of the second QPQ required? BlueMoonset (talk) 04:31, 22 March 2024 (UTC)Reply