Template:Did you know nominations/St. Thomas Chapel
- 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) 23:56, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
St. Thomas Chapel
[edit]
- ... that St. Thomas Chapel (pictured) was used as a hospital and later a stable during the American Civil War?
- Reviewed: Alicia Munnell, Ust'-Ishim man
5x expanded by AgnosticPreachersKid (talk). Self nominated at 05:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC).
This article is long enough and is within Wikipedia core policy and guidelines, but the article history that it is neither new nor meets the 5X expansion criterion within the last seven days. This seems to disqualify the DYK nomination, which is unfortunate because overall, I find the article informative and well done.The hook is interesting, accurate and cited in-line.
- Maybe the text could be expanded by elaborating on the connection of the Hite family, which is mentioned only in passing. This family was one of the earliest to settle in Middletown and Old Frederick County. Although that occurred about a century before this church was built, the backup material for NRHP listing explains the connection more extensively, so I think it should not be extraneous to the article. Bruin2 (talk) 00:11, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
- I'm glad you found it informative. I don't understand though when you say "article history that it is neither new nor meets the 5X expansion criterion within the last seven days". I started expanding the article on October 26. At that point, it was 614 characters. (according to this) I finished editing the article two days later with 3428 characters, a 5.58x expansion. APK whisper in my ear 01:29, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I stand corrected on my previous comment about newness. The article does meet the required time frame. I used the javascript link you sent to check character counts on the two revisions. Although I'm still short of the 5x, this is likely due to my inexperience using the script, and should be checked by someone who is familiar with the procedure (and what should or should not be included. With that proviso, I think the DYK merits advancement, and have marked this comment accordingly. I think you have made a good article. Bruin2 (talk) 17:16, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
