The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 05:49, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Created/expanded by
Bamse (
talk). Self nom at 17:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
This is an impressive, comprehensive, detailed article. However I do not believe it qualifies for DYK. It fails on the grounds of "newness" because
Bamse started the article on 12th November. It has been expanded considerably since 5th December but it was already a substantial article back in November.
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 20:29, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the review. I created the article starting 12th November, but in my userspace/sandbox (
here). I moved it to article space on December 8. So for the purpose of DYK, it is still new.
bamse (
talk) 20:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Well I missed that, although I thought I had looked through the lengthy history of the article carefully! Length, date of creation and the hook and its reference are fine. The image however is rather pale and I wonder whether it is distinctive enough for a thumbnail on DYK.
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 06:07, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Agree with the image. Maybe somebody with access can help with
this requrest which would give us a beautiful color image of the scene.
bamse (
talk) 06:48, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks to
User:Quadalpha there is now a high quality image of the scene available. Do you think it would look better with the calligraphy removed?
bamse (
talk) 13:42, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I replaced the image with a crop showing only the painting.
bamse (
talk) 18:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)