Template:Did you know nominations/Tonoshō, Kagawa
- 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: rejected by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
The nominator stated they would be unable to expand the article to meet requirements.
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tonoshō, Kagawa
Historic town center of Tonoshō
- ...that the historic town center of Tonoshō (pictured) was laid out to foil potential invasions?
- ALT1:... that the maze-like town center of Tonoshō (pictured) was purposefully designed to foil potential invasions in the 15th century?
- Comment: Whatever sounds most interesting; apparently there are only a few towns like this in Japan so thought I'd nominate. Picture is not necessary. First time nominating something like this.
5x expanded by Fredlesaltique (talk). Self-nominated at 02:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC).
@Fredlesaltique: sorry for the double ping, I deleted my earlier comment here to avoid confusion as I thought this was a new article. Because it is not new and not recently promoted to GA status, DYK requires 5x expansion of the readable prose size (as measured with a tool like WP:Prosesize or DYKcheck). Prior to your expansion, the article was at 535 characters, so a 5x expansion would be at least 2675 characters. It's currently at 1069 characters, so would need more expansion to be eligible. Feel free to do this within the next week or so if you'd like, and then this can be reviewed. DanCherek (talk) 04:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- DanCherek I think expanding it by that much would just encourage a lot of overly-detailed prose or fluff writing at this point, so probably better not to. (I was trying to just keep it a readable overview with more detailed sources). I appreciate the response though, and no worries about the double ping! Cheers, Fredlesaltique (talk) 04:33, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
