This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

France Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Haiti Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Haiti, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Haiti-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.HaitiWikipedia:WikiProject HaitiTemplate:WikiProject HaitiHaiti articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

A fact from The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 May 2013 ( check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo won the Pulitzer Prize for Biography or Autobiography in 2013? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal, and the Real Count of Monte Cristo.

I've reverted another editor's subdividing this section because in my opinion it created too many very small subsections. But this does bring up a point: Perhaps we should list the two WINS first, and then the nominations, and then the "best of" lists. Anyway, food for thought. We could actually possibly make the section into two paragraphs: Wins and Noms, and Best-of lists. Please discuss below. Softlavender ( talk) 22:43, 30 August 2013 (UTC) reply