Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(suggesting factual corrections to article) |
imported>97198 m (italics) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
--> | --> | ||
| − | * ... that '''[[Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury]]''' ''(pictured)'' was hung in the Lord's Pavilion after Kent were unable to afford the insurance? | + | * ... that '''''[[Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury]]''''' ''(pictured)'' was hung in the Lord's Pavilion after Kent were unable to afford the insurance? |
<!-- | <!-- | ||
--> | --> | ||
Revision as of 09:07, 3 May 2014
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury
- ... that Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury (pictured) was hung in the Lord's Pavilion after Kent were unable to afford the insurance?
- Reviewed: 2012 Summer Paralympics
Created by The C of E (talk). Self nominated at 09:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC).
Length, date, hook, all OK. Hook confirmed by online citation. The article is most interesting (to me at least) and is well written and well referenced. (Personal note: I am a life member of LCCC, and have not been influenced in any way by this!) --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello, may someone new to DYK comment? (Being here because I heard there was need for more people to check facts in DYK.) I found the hook confusing, not knowing who Kent are, what Lord's Pavilion is, what the linked title meant. How about ... that the Kent Country Cricket Club had to sell their famous painting, Kent vs Lancashire at Canterbury (pictured), because they could no longer afford to insure it?
- Agree the article has lots of references and reads well, and there are no paraphrasing issues, it's clearly a lot of work and well done. These are accuracy fixes after checking the references. Do I post them here or on the article, or can I just change the article?
- add "in the UK" in the lede
- source two does not give the 2005 date in the article
- is there a source for the 7.77% statement?
- source says Harris suggested an action shot, not that he stipulated it
- is there a source that says it was Harris who chose Tayler? Otherwise that sentence currently looks like synthesis
- source 3 does say the painting is viewed as a reminder of an era, but does not say that is because of its colours, so that statement looks like OR
- re source 7, the quote actually refers to the whole painting, not just Blythe in it
- in the history section, the statement that Kent retained a print on display after loaning the original to MCC is not contained in the given source (source 1)
- source 8 is synthesis; though it confirms Kent had debts it doesn't mention selling the painting because of them as the article asserts
- source 9 sentence should really read "Kent sold the painting but announced that they were going to permit it to remain at Lord's in the short term"
- correction: Sotheby's guide price was 300,000 to 500,000, not 50,000
- source 11 doesn't say anything about Brownsford's intentions as asserted in the article
- source 13 does not refer to that print being the original one
- 184.147.147.28 (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
