Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Brut Chronicle"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Serial Number 54129 (ice one) |
imported>Cwmhiraeth (To Prep 2) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | <noinclude>[[Category:Passed DYK nominations from May 2017]]<div style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |
| − | + | :''The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify this page.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}|this nomination's talk page]], [[Talk:{{SUBPAGENAME}}|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 [[User:Cwmhiraeth|Cwmhiraeth]] ([[User talk:Cwmhiraeth|talk]]) 05:46, 17 June 2017 (UTC)<br /> |
{{DYK conditions}} | {{DYK conditions}} | ||
====Brut Chronicle==== | ====Brut Chronicle==== | ||
{{DYK nompage links|nompage=Brut Chronicle|Brut Chronicle}} | {{DYK nompage links|nompage=Brut Chronicle|Brut Chronicle}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
* ... Did you know that in medieval England, the '''''[[Brut Chronicle]]''''' was one of the most-copied chronicles of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries?[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gSgL0jozFZwC&pg=PA169&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Copied&f=false ] | * ... Did you know that in medieval England, the '''''[[Brut Chronicle]]''''' was one of the most-copied chronicles of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries?[https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gSgL0jozFZwC&pg=PA169&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Copied&f=false ] | ||
:*<small>Created by [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi]] ([[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|talk]]) and [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User:Drmies|Talk]]). Nominated by [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi]] ([[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|talk]]) at 07:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC).</small> | :*<small>Created by [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi]] ([[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|talk]]) and [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User:Drmies|Talk]]). Nominated by [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi]] ([[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|talk]]) at 07:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC).</small> | ||
:* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Ulubey Canyon Nature Park]] | :* ''Reviewed'': [[Template:Did you know nominations/Ulubey Canyon Nature Park]] | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
:* [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] New enough (transcluded late/wrong date, but nom was made day of, and all the content was there.) Long enough. No copyvio or close plagiarism detected. Neutral and cited. QPQ done and the hook is interesting and short enough. Good to go.<p>{{replyto|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|Drmies}} really enjoyed reading this. A nice break from 17th century conclaves :) If you wouldn't mind a quick stylistic comment: the article seemed a slightly heavy on parenthetical comments that threw me off a bit as a reader. Not a huge issue, but the one thing that stood out to me. Anyway, great work and thanks for the interesting read. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 03:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC) | :* [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] New enough (transcluded late/wrong date, but nom was made day of, and all the content was there.) Long enough. No copyvio or close plagiarism detected. Neutral and cited. QPQ done and the hook is interesting and short enough. Good to go.<p>{{replyto|Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|Drmies}} really enjoyed reading this. A nice break from 17th century conclaves :) If you wouldn't mind a quick stylistic comment: the article seemed a slightly heavy on parenthetical comments that threw me off a bit as a reader. Not a huge issue, but the one thing that stood out to me. Anyway, great work and thanks for the interesting read. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 03:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC) | ||
| − | ::Thanks {{u|TonyBallioni}} :) I blame {{u|Drmies}} for those bits, of course ;) Cheers! — [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:maroon; text-shadow:#666362 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''O Fortuna'''</span>]][[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:navy"><sup>''''' semper crescis, aut decrescis'''''</sup></span>]] 15:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC) | + | ::Thanks {{u|TonyBallioni}} :) I blame {{u|Drmies}} for those bits, of course ;) Cheers! — [[User:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:maroon; text-shadow:#666362 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;">'''O Fortuna'''</span>]][[User talk:Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi|<span style="color:navy"><sup>''''' semper crescis, aut decrescis'''''</sup></span>]] 15:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)</div></noinclude><!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> |
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 05:46, 17 June 2017
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:46, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Brut Chronicle
- ... Did you know that in medieval England, the Brut Chronicle was one of the most-copied chronicles of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries?[1]
- Created by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk) and Drmies (Talk). Nominated by Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi (talk) at 07:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC).
New enough (transcluded late/wrong date, but nom was made day of, and all the content was there.) Long enough. No copyvio or close plagiarism detected. Neutral and cited. QPQ done and the hook is interesting and short enough. Good to go.Template:Replyto really enjoyed reading this. A nice break from 17th century conclaves :) If you wouldn't mind a quick stylistic comment: the article seemed a slightly heavy on parenthetical comments that threw me off a bit as a reader. Not a huge issue, but the one thing that stood out to me. Anyway, great work and thanks for the interesting read. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Template:U :) I blame Template:U for those bits, of course ;) Cheers! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 15:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)