Template:Did you know nominations/El Progreso Department
- 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 Vanamonde (talk) 09:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
El Progreso Department
[edit]- ... that El Progreso Department in Guatemala was dissolved 12 years after its creation, only to be recreated 14 years later? Source: "The department of El Progreso was created by executive decree on 13 April 1908...On 9 June 1920, after the president was overthrown, the department was dissolved by the government...The department was reestablished on 3 April 1934...
- ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link], or briefly cite, the source)
5x expanded by Simon Burchell (talk). Self-nominated at 14:51, 1 November 2016 (UTC).
I think this hook is really good, but the citation that is in the article seems to be off, and I can't find a matching document online. I think if the citation is improved, it will be a very interesting hook. Kmwebber (talk) 04:23, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Kmwebber
- @Kmwebber: Thanks for the review. The basic facts can be seen in the Hernández 2004 map from Prensa Libre, in the second paragraph of the introductory text. However, I think the confusion is due to the dual-numbering in the SEGEPLAN publication - I used the published page numbering at the foot of each page, which is different from the PDF page numbering. Page 13, which references the hook, is actually PDF page 21. All the best, Simon Burchell (talk) 19:18, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
This article is a five-fold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The hook facts have inline citations to Spanish language sources and are accepted in good faith. The article is neutral and I was unable to assess whether it had any policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:11, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
