A fact from Émilie de Rodat appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 January 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion articles
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) 12:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply
5× expansion of 17 July 2020 version completed from 620 characters to 7,945 and nominated on the same day.
No copyvios detected (high confidence of violation due to direct quotes that have all been cited) and duplication detector check of online sources
[1] reveal no close paraphrasing issues (allowing for
WP:LIMITED and direct quotes; AGF book scans and foreign language sources which can't go through Dup detector). Article is well-sourced. Hook is 163 characters long (under 200 character max.) and is interesting. Ref 1 (verifying the hook) is a reliable source. QPQ done. Image is free and in public domain. Looks good to go! —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 07:12, 23 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Please remove the repetition ("founded"..."founded") from the hook.
Yoninah (
talk) 23:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Restoring tick per Bloom6132's review.
Yoninah (
talk) 11:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
OK, I came by to promote this, but the second article cited in the hook is completely unreferenced. Could you add a few sources to that? Also, if you could tighten the hook wording or mention an interesting fact, it would help. Thanks,
Yoninah (
talk) 21:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The url is the Butler source; I was being lazy by not making it into an inline source. Tighten the hook wording how? It's already under the required 200 character limit. Rodat founded a religious order and provided free education for poor girls; that's not interesting enough? How about this rewording, though?
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 22:40, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah: duh, that's what you mean! Yes, I will go do that, no problem. Didn't know that was a DYK thing. ;) Thanks.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 23:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Figureskatingfan: wow, the second article looks great now. Are you thinking of expanding it a bit more and making this a two-article hook?
Yoninah (
talk) 21:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah:, oh that's how it's a DYK thing! How refreshing to know that even those of us who have been around forever (in my case, since 2007) can still learn stuff, right? Seriously, that's what comes of not creating and expanding articles enough. To be honest, I've never done that before. But what the heck, why not. Would you mind putting this DYK on hold for a couple of days to give me time to do that? Thanks.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 22:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Sure. BTW the "DYK thing" is to try not to link to an inadequate article from the main page. It happens often enough, but I try to improve things on my watch :) Thanks,
Yoninah (
talk) 11:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah: I've expanded the second article as per your suggestion. Of course, you're right, this does improve things. I try and do the same, as we all should. I added bold font to the second article; my second QPQ is forthcoming. Thanks.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 23:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Bloom6132: we now have a multi-article nomination. Would you like to review the new article so I can promote it? Thanks,
Yoninah (
talk) 12:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah: For sure, I'll have a look later today. —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 21:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Figureskatingfan: My apologies for putting off the review and losing motivation. —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 12:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply
5× expansion of 3 January 2021 version completed from 787 characters to 8,017 and part of existing nomination.
No copyvios detected (high confidence of violation due to direct quotes that have all been cited) and duplication detector check of online sources
[2][3][4][5] reveal no close paraphrasing issues (allowing for
WP:LIMITED and direct quotes; AGF book scans and foreign language sources which can't go through Dup detector). Article is well-sourced. New hook (ALT2) is 171 characters long (under 200 character max.) and is interesting. Ref 1 (verifying the hook) is a reliable source. Second QPQ done. Looks good to go! —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 12:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply
A fact from Émilie de Rodat appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 January 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion articles
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) 12:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply
5× expansion of 17 July 2020 version completed from 620 characters to 7,945 and nominated on the same day.
No copyvios detected (high confidence of violation due to direct quotes that have all been cited) and duplication detector check of online sources
[1] reveal no close paraphrasing issues (allowing for
WP:LIMITED and direct quotes; AGF book scans and foreign language sources which can't go through Dup detector). Article is well-sourced. Hook is 163 characters long (under 200 character max.) and is interesting. Ref 1 (verifying the hook) is a reliable source. QPQ done. Image is free and in public domain. Looks good to go! —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 07:12, 23 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Please remove the repetition ("founded"..."founded") from the hook.
Yoninah (
talk) 23:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Restoring tick per Bloom6132's review.
Yoninah (
talk) 11:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)reply
OK, I came by to promote this, but the second article cited in the hook is completely unreferenced. Could you add a few sources to that? Also, if you could tighten the hook wording or mention an interesting fact, it would help. Thanks,
Yoninah (
talk) 21:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
The url is the Butler source; I was being lazy by not making it into an inline source. Tighten the hook wording how? It's already under the required 200 character limit. Rodat founded a religious order and provided free education for poor girls; that's not interesting enough? How about this rewording, though?
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 22:40, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah: duh, that's what you mean! Yes, I will go do that, no problem. Didn't know that was a DYK thing. ;) Thanks.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 23:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Figureskatingfan: wow, the second article looks great now. Are you thinking of expanding it a bit more and making this a two-article hook?
Yoninah (
talk) 21:22, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah:, oh that's how it's a DYK thing! How refreshing to know that even those of us who have been around forever (in my case, since 2007) can still learn stuff, right? Seriously, that's what comes of not creating and expanding articles enough. To be honest, I've never done that before. But what the heck, why not. Would you mind putting this DYK on hold for a couple of days to give me time to do that? Thanks.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 22:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)reply
Sure. BTW the "DYK thing" is to try not to link to an inadequate article from the main page. It happens often enough, but I try to improve things on my watch :) Thanks,
Yoninah (
talk) 11:06, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah: I've expanded the second article as per your suggestion. Of course, you're right, this does improve things. I try and do the same, as we all should. I added bold font to the second article; my second QPQ is forthcoming. Thanks.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (
talk) 23:23, 5 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Bloom6132: we now have a multi-article nomination. Would you like to review the new article so I can promote it? Thanks,
Yoninah (
talk) 12:43, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Yoninah: For sure, I'll have a look later today. —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 21:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Figureskatingfan: My apologies for putting off the review and losing motivation. —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 12:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply
5× expansion of 3 January 2021 version completed from 787 characters to 8,017 and part of existing nomination.
No copyvios detected (high confidence of violation due to direct quotes that have all been cited) and duplication detector check of online sources
[2][3][4][5] reveal no close paraphrasing issues (allowing for
WP:LIMITED and direct quotes; AGF book scans and foreign language sources which can't go through Dup detector). Article is well-sourced. New hook (ALT2) is 171 characters long (under 200 character max.) and is interesting. Ref 1 (verifying the hook) is a reliable source. Second QPQ done. Looks good to go! —
Bloom6132 (
talk) 12:21, 11 January 2021 (UTC)reply