Talk:Notarial Archives

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Malta Mid‑importance

	Malta portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Notarial Archives appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 April 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that 15th-century documents from the Notarial Archives of Malta were almost thrown away in 2008?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Notarial Archives (Malta).

Wikipedia

Did you know? nomination

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 97198 (talk) 11:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that 15th century documents from the Notarial Archives of Malta were almost thrown away in 2008? Source: "They were in garbage bags together with all kinds of rubbish and were destined to be disposed of. It seems that in 2008 an attempt was made to tidy up the offices of the Notarial Archives and the process was left in the hands of a handyman who collected what he thought were old, torn papers and collected them in preparation to their disposal. Fortunately for Malta, they were not thrown away." (The Malta Independent of 23 May 2015)
- ALT1:... that damaged documents from the Notarial Archives of Malta formed the basis of an art photography exhibition? Source: "Parallel Existences, an art photography exhibition by celebrated photographer Alex Attard, highlights a series of never-before-seen, sculpture-like historical documents ... this photography project looks into the original purpose of these damaged documents and presents a new narrative..." (Indulge)
- ALT2:... that Il-Kantilena, the oldest known text in Maltese, was discovered in 1966 at the Notarial Archives in Valletta? Source: "This document is the oldest piece of literature found written in Maltese. ... It was discovered by Prof. Godfrey Wettinger and Patri Mikiel Fsadni on the 22nd September 1966. ... The original document can be found in the Notarial Archives in Valletta." (Office of the Notary to Government and Notarial Archives)

Reviewed: Muhammad al-Riquti

Created by Xwejnusgozo (talk). Self-nominated at 22:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Review underway... Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 16:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Created on 28th March and nominated on that date.
Comfortably long enough and graded correctly at C-class (probably could be B; in any case, not a stub!)
Referencing is fine throughout: good quality sources are used and have been interpreted correctly. Inline citations are used appropriately throughout.
Quality of prose is good; no problems with neutrality or similar.
The nomination has no image.
QPQ review has been done.
Hooks: all are within policy, correctly cited and supported, interesting and suitable to use. The original hook is the most eye-catching.

I have been through the article in some detail comparing the text to the sources. I have found only one sentence which could be considered too close to the source material: Today, the archives fall under the responsibility of the Chief Notary to Government (article) vs. Today, the Notarial Archives are governed by a separate legislation and fall under the responsibility of the Chief Notary to Government (source). Rewording to make the Chief Notary to Government the subject of the sentence would overcome this.
Web Archive link for refs [5] and [15] (both from Malta Today) are not working. (I have been able to access the website directly, though, to verify them.)

As a regular user of regional and national archives in my own country, it is pleasing to find such a detailed article on Malta's. Just a couple of issues to resolve. Cheers, Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 19:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hassocks5489: Thanks for the review! I changed the sentence with close paraphrasing and I added more detail to explain the situation better (I also mentioned the Office of the Notary to Government and Notarial Archives, which had not been mentioned earlier). I added a new source for this (now it's ref 5). I rechecked the archived links of the Malta Today sources (currently ref 6 and ref 16) and both of them seem to work OK for me. Xwejnusgozo (talk) 22:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All working for me tonight; must have been a temporary glitch yesterday. All ready to go now. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 19:48, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]