![]() | Funerary Monument to Sir John Hawkwood is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 4, 2008. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 9, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the
Funerary Monument to Sir John Hawkwood (pictured) is the oldest authenticated and extant work of
Paolo Uccello? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What an amazing article, very impressive. Well done to the author(s). 86.157.252.205 ( talk) 19:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I will be doing the review of this article. I happen to know a bit about the work of art, so I'm pleased I'll get to be doing the review. Often times, I review articles with subject matter of little or no interest to me, so this is a nice change of pace. Enough about me...overall the article is well written and sourced. There are, however, a few issues to be worked out before I can pass it:
Like I said, not too much to fix. After all of this is done, I'll copy edit the article and pass it. I'm putting the article on hold for one week. If at the end of the week, no real progress has been made, I'll fail the article. If the article is still being actively edited and improved, I have no problem extending the hold. Good work! Nikki 311 20:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I should be able to make all these changes quickly. I think you are interpreting the lead guideline a little too mathetically rigidly (especially because the definition of a "paragraph" has no such precision) but will comply. I also think you are wrong about the centuries; please see 15th century, 16th century, etc. The brackets I believe are an artifact of the editing process. Savidan 23:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
"Hawkwood won many victories for Florence, including his suppression of the arti minori revolt in January 1382"
Should this link to the Revolt of the Ciompi instead of to the article on Guild? (Thanks for featuring this article, by the way). --- Sluzzelin talk 03:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text (using a script) in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 14:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Is this article actually about an equestrian statue? If not, the category should be removed. --- Another Believer ( Talk) 14:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
![]() | Funerary Monument to Sir John Hawkwood is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 4, 2008. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
April 9, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the
Funerary Monument to Sir John Hawkwood (pictured) is the oldest authenticated and extant work of
Paolo Uccello? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
![]() | This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
What an amazing article, very impressive. Well done to the author(s). 86.157.252.205 ( talk) 19:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I will be doing the review of this article. I happen to know a bit about the work of art, so I'm pleased I'll get to be doing the review. Often times, I review articles with subject matter of little or no interest to me, so this is a nice change of pace. Enough about me...overall the article is well written and sourced. There are, however, a few issues to be worked out before I can pass it:
Like I said, not too much to fix. After all of this is done, I'll copy edit the article and pass it. I'm putting the article on hold for one week. If at the end of the week, no real progress has been made, I'll fail the article. If the article is still being actively edited and improved, I have no problem extending the hold. Good work! Nikki 311 20:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I should be able to make all these changes quickly. I think you are interpreting the lead guideline a little too mathetically rigidly (especially because the definition of a "paragraph" has no such precision) but will comply. I also think you are wrong about the centuries; please see 15th century, 16th century, etc. The brackets I believe are an artifact of the editing process. Savidan 23:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
"Hawkwood won many victories for Florence, including his suppression of the arti minori revolt in January 1382"
Should this link to the Revolt of the Ciompi instead of to the article on Guild? (Thanks for featuring this article, by the way). --- Sluzzelin talk 03:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text (using a script) in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 14:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Is this article actually about an equestrian statue? If not, the category should be removed. --- Another Believer ( Talk) 14:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)