Talk:HMS Chichester (1785)
Appearance
A fact from HMS Chichester (1785) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 July 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Did you know nomination
[edit]- 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 Z1720 (talk) 16:15, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that HMS Chichester was designed to carry 44 guns but never carried more than 22? Source: *Winfield, Rif (2008). British Warships in the Age of Sail 1793–1817: Design, Construction, Careers and Fates. Barnsley: Seaforth. p. 183. ISBN 1-86176-246-1.
Created by Ykraps (talk). Self-nominated at 06:49, 29 June 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
- Interesting:
- Other problems: - "never carrying more than 22" is included in the lead but should also be repeated in the body of the article with the source
QPQ: Done. |
Overall: Article was moved to mainspace on 29 June and nominated the same day, it is also easily long enough. Earwig looks good, and the hook is interesting but part of it is not directly included in the body of the article with a source (see above). QPQ has been completed, so this will be good to go when the above minor issue is resolved. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:07, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- @PCN02WPS: I've added to the last sentence. --Ykraps (talk) 05:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Awesome! We're good to go. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 14:23, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- @PCN02WPS: I've added to the last sentence. --Ykraps (talk) 05:50, 3 July 2022 (UTC)