Template:Did you know nominations/Govanhill Baths
< Template:Did you know nominations
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Revision as of 01:15, 19 November 2014 by imported>Yoninah (good to go)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Govanhill Baths
- ... that Govanhill Baths (pictured) is the last surviving Edwardian public bathhouse in Glasgow?
- Reviewed: John Lewis Christmas advert
- Comment: Other hook ideas welcome
Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:08, 4 October 2014 (UTC).
- Can we have a QPQ please Template:Ping? Then the review can proceed. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 14:09, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Adding icon to indicate that QPQ is still pending over a month after nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:12, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Full review needed for this nomination. Edwardx, note that the copyvio check in your QPQ review was using a deprecated tool; please redo the check for copyvio and close paraphrasing so it can be counted as a complete review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:16, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- Pictures - awesome. Content and writing - awesome. References...we have a 'citation needed' tag sitting in there. Solve that issue and I'll stick a big fat tick on it. (And may I suggest using your award winning picture in the hook rather than the current one?) PanydThe muffin is not subtle 11:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Notice: This article required a full re-edit to conform to sourcing etc. so I have been doing it for an hour or two, so please don't fully rewrite the article as it may take me another hour while I am kept busy with something but it's mostly done and checked and will definitely be DYK standard shortly, thanks :)~ R.T.G 21:42, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
I re-edited and checked to fully conform to DYK, except for the sentence tagged citation needed. Just remove it if it is being moved to prep please, otherwise I thought it should be left up in the mean time in case a source becomes apparent. If I should have removed it myself please note that, thanks, :)~ R.T.G 21:59, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
- I added you to the creators. Revert me if I shouldn't have. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
- I posted this to Philfrenzys talk but I should have posted here for others, "Although I did a major edit to the article, if I am listed as a creator, nominator or write the hook, I cannot pass it for review, and strictly speaking I am over a month late for that but I'll consider that a compliment to my effort, thanks o/ " ~ R.T.G 22:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
- As I understand it, there's nothing wrong with you being made a co-creator by the grateful nominators during the course of your review and approval of the hook. (It's happened to me numerous times.) Yoninah (talk) 17:36, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I came by to promote it, saw the cite-needed tag, and also saw RTG's instruction to remove the sentence. Not only does that cut the Closure section in half, but it also leaves a 90-year hole in the history, which now stands at one paragraph. I noticed more history in Footnote 4 that should be added to the article; surely there's more? Yoninah (talk) 17:42, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- It was probably me that put the tag in. You are correct, the whole of the history of the building before closure is missing. I will see what I can find. It may not amount to much if they were just baths for the whole time but it should be in there. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- I created a short history section and resolved the tag issue. Should be fine now. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:58, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- I posted this to Philfrenzys talk but I should have posted here for others, "Although I did a major edit to the article, if I am listed as a creator, nominator or write the hook, I cannot pass it for review, and strictly speaking I am over a month late for that but I'll consider that a compliment to my effort, thanks o/ " ~ R.T.G 22:16, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
- I added you to the creators. Revert me if I shouldn't have. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2014 (UTC)