Template:Did you know nominations/Freydal
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Freydal
Knights jousting with ‘exploding shields’ from Freydal
... that knights enjoyed cross-dressing after a day’s jousting, according to the Freydal illuminated manuscript?Source: The Last Knight: The Art, Armor, and Ambition of Maximilian I, p. 122 published by the Metropolitan Museum of Art- ALT1:... that knights jousted with exploding shields (pictured), according to the Freydal illuminated manuscript?Source: The Last Knight: The Art, Armor, and Ambition of Maximilian I, p. 125 published by the Metropolitan Museum of Art
- Reviewed: Fatimid navy
Created by DeCausa (talk). Self-nominated at 09:59, 13 January 2020 (UTC).
Wow, great article. Well-written and interesting. Hooks are relevant, interesting, and referenced. While ALT0 is possibly slightly hookier, the image alone makes ALT1 worth it (added "(pictured)" to the hook). Image is used in article, appropriate, and correctly licensed. From a spotcheck I didn't find any copyright problems. Two things remain for this to pass: a QPQ review, and fixing refs #30 and #31 (Cuneo 2002 and Terjanian 1995 don't appear to exist). For emphasis and slightly better phrasing, may I suggest
ALT2: "... that according to the Freydal illuminated manuscript, knights jousted with exploding shields (pictured)? Constantine ✍ 19:08, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- Great, thanks Constantine, I’ve fixed the Harvard references: I’d put the editor rather than the author name in 30 and the wrong year in 31. Should now link to the right book. Happy with ALT2 and yes, I need to do a QPQ.DeCausa (talk) 20:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- QPQ now done and review added above.DeCausa (talk) 21:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
- @DeCausa: Then I am happy to mark this as
good to go! Constantine ✍ 16:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, I came by to promote this, but one paragraph lacks a citation, per Rule D2. I'd also like to note that the image is very dark and difficult to make out at thumbnail size, so I planned to promote it to a non-image slot. But I see you have many colorful images in the article, so I wonder if you'd like to use one of the general jousting ones instead? Yoninah (talk) 16:58, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: I’ve added a citation - but it’s not necessary. RD2 isn’t an absolute requirement (“generally”). The facts in that paragraph are basic/fundamental intro info about Maximilian that isn’t likely to be challenged. WP:BLUE WP:LIKELY. On the image, there’s another exploding shields pic at the top of the article. But it’s not any different. Suggest that original hook (ALT0) is used without a pic. DeCausa (talk) 21:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- @DeCausa: OK. But the article implies that this was seen in only one manuscript. How can you expand it into a blanket statement about all knights? Yoninah (talk) 23:17, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Yoninah: I’ve added a citation - but it’s not necessary. RD2 isn’t an absolute requirement (“generally”). The facts in that paragraph are basic/fundamental intro info about Maximilian that isn’t likely to be challenged. WP:BLUE WP:LIKELY. On the image, there’s another exploding shields pic at the top of the article. But it’s not any different. Suggest that original hook (ALT0) is used without a pic. DeCausa (talk) 21:52, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- @DeCausa: Then I am happy to mark this as
