Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Canute's Palace"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Surtsicna |
imported>Surtsicna |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
:*I suggest replacing "King Canute" with "Canute the Great", as there have been several kings named Canute and it doesn't hurt to be precise. He is almost always called "the Great" anyway. [http://toolserver.org/~earwig/copyvios?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Canute%27s+Palace&url= No copyright violation.] Everything checks out, including the hook, but you still need to review another nomination. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 15:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | :*I suggest replacing "King Canute" with "Canute the Great", as there have been several kings named Canute and it doesn't hurt to be precise. He is almost always called "the Great" anyway. [http://toolserver.org/~earwig/copyvios?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Canute%27s+Palace&url= No copyright violation.] Everything checks out, including the hook, but you still need to review another nomination. [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 15:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
::*I prefer the original hook - I have never heard "King Canute" referred to as "Canute the Great" outside Wikipedia; ultimately, that decision is up to the hook's promoter. Could you now sign off your review. Thanks. -- [[User:Daemonic Kangaroo|Daemonic Kangaroo]] ([[User talk:Daemonic Kangaroo|talk]]) 07:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC) | ::*I prefer the original hook - I have never heard "King Canute" referred to as "Canute the Great" outside Wikipedia; ultimately, that decision is up to the hook's promoter. Could you now sign off your review. Thanks. -- [[User:Daemonic Kangaroo|Daemonic Kangaroo]] ([[User talk:Daemonic Kangaroo|talk]]) 07:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
| − | :::Never? Really? I've seen him referred to as such couple of times, including the [http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensofEngland/TheAnglo-Saxonkings/CanutetheGreat.aspx almighty official website of the British monarchy]. If the name is indeed that uncommon, there's a big problem to be reported at [[Talk:Cnut the Great]]. Anyway, everything seems to be OK. [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 19:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC) | + | :::*Never? Really? I've seen him referred to as such couple of times, including the [http://www.royal.gov.uk/HistoryoftheMonarchy/KingsandQueensofEngland/TheAnglo-Saxonkings/CanutetheGreat.aspx almighty official website of the British monarchy]. If the name is indeed that uncommon, there's a big problem to be reported at [[Talk:Cnut the Great]]. Anyway, everything seems to be OK. [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] [[User:Surtsicna|Surtsicna]] ([[User talk:Surtsicna|talk]]) 19:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC) |
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | {{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | ||
Revision as of 19:12, 24 July 2013
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Canute's Palace
- ... that Canute's Palace (pictured) had no connection with King Canute, nor was it a palace?
- Reviewed: William Browne (died 1514)
Created by Waggers (talk), Daemonic Kangaroo (talk). Nominated by Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) at 05:37, 22 July 2013 (UTC).
- I suggest replacing "King Canute" with "Canute the Great", as there have been several kings named Canute and it doesn't hurt to be precise. He is almost always called "the Great" anyway. No copyright violation. Everything checks out, including the hook, but you still need to review another nomination. Surtsicna (talk) 15:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
- I prefer the original hook - I have never heard "King Canute" referred to as "Canute the Great" outside Wikipedia; ultimately, that decision is up to the hook's promoter. Could you now sign off your review. Thanks. -- Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Never? Really? I've seen him referred to as such couple of times, including the almighty official website of the British monarchy. If the name is indeed that uncommon, there's a big problem to be reported at Talk:Cnut the Great. Anyway, everything seems to be OK.
Surtsicna (talk) 19:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- Never? Really? I've seen him referred to as such couple of times, including the almighty official website of the British monarchy. If the name is indeed that uncommon, there's a big problem to be reported at Talk:Cnut the Great. Anyway, everything seems to be OK.