Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Dewey Decimal Classification"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Nemo bis m (strike obviously doesn't work) |
imported>BlueMoonset (iconography) |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
::[[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]] Nemo, I believe you misunderstand the rules about GA nominations: "g) Articles designated as Good articles within the past five days are also eligible." As of Sept 6, 2013, [[Wikipedia:Did_you_know/Good_Article_RfC#Closure|Newly promoted GAs will be eligible for DYK regardless of whether they were recently expanded]]. This article passed GA on Feb 13, so it qualifies under DYK criteria. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 23:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC) | ::[[File:Symbol redirect vote 4.svg|16px]] Nemo, I believe you misunderstand the rules about GA nominations: "g) Articles designated as Good articles within the past five days are also eligible." As of Sept 6, 2013, [[Wikipedia:Did_you_know/Good_Article_RfC#Closure|Newly promoted GAs will be eligible for DYK regardless of whether they were recently expanded]]. This article passed GA on Feb 13, so it qualifies under DYK criteria. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 23:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC) | ||
:::That's why I deferred to others, I don't know the rules well enough. ;-) Before your comment (and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADid_you_know&action=historysubmit&diff=596256350&oldid=594703950]) I simply didn't realise that satisfying ''one'' of the requirements 1.a-g suffices. Corrected above. --[[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 16:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC) | :::That's why I deferred to others, I don't know the rules well enough. ;-) Before your comment (and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADid_you_know&action=historysubmit&diff=596256350&oldid=594703950]) I simply didn't realise that satisfying ''one'' of the requirements 1.a-g suffices. Corrected above. --[[User:Nemo_bis|Nemo]] 16:33, 20 February 2014 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::::Changing earlier icons really shouldn't be done, and even if they are, the latest icon holds sway, which is Maile's review again. If this is approved, please say so. However, DYK reviews should not rest on the GA review, but be done independently, as some DYK criteria are tougher than GA. It probably makes sense, however, to have a more experienced reviewer check this over, since the original reviewer is shaky on DYK rules in general. [[User:BlueMoonset|BlueMoonset]] ([[User talk:BlueMoonset|talk]]) 19:09, 20 February 2014 (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 19:09, 20 February 2014
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Dewey Decimal Classification
- ... that Dewey Decimal Classification (inventor pictured) paved the way for open-shelf access for library patrons?
- ALT1:... that before Dewey Decimal Classification (inventor pictured), books in most libraries were arranged first by height and then by order of acquisition?
- Reviewed: Exempt (Third party nom)
Improved to Good Article status by SPat (talk). Nominated by Ohconfucius (talk) at 08:02, 14 February 2014 (UTC).
5px16px The topic is very notable. The hook is of great interest (it's "obvious" but I admit I never looked at it that way), is referenced in a recently added paragraph with a reliable source published by a notable publisher. I've only skimmed the rest of the article, I rely on the reviewers who agreed to its good article status. However, even if we consider the whole period in which the article was brought to GA status [1], in no way we can consider the text to have grown fivefold. I would IAR this requirement given the very good standing with regard to the others and considering that the hook is a recently introduced information making an otherwise tough/"boring" article more accessible/palatable, but I refrain to do so given my bias towards librarian topics. I'll let someone else decide. --Nemo 18:53, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
- 16px Nemo, I believe you misunderstand the rules about GA nominations: "g) Articles designated as Good articles within the past five days are also eligible." As of Sept 6, 2013, Newly promoted GAs will be eligible for DYK regardless of whether they were recently expanded. This article passed GA on Feb 13, so it qualifies under DYK criteria. — Maile (talk) 23:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
- Changing earlier icons really shouldn't be done, and even if they are, the latest icon holds sway, which is Maile's review again. If this is approved, please say so. However, DYK reviews should not rest on the GA review, but be done independently, as some DYK criteria are tougher than GA. It probably makes sense, however, to have a more experienced reviewer check this over, since the original reviewer is shaky on DYK rules in general. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:09, 20 February 2014 (UTC)