Featured articleAlan Wace 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 26, 2024Good article nomineeListed
May 4, 2024Featured article candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 6, 2023.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the archaeologist Alan Wace worked undercover for British intelligence during both world wars?
Current status: Featured article

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Vaticidalprophet talk 02:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

5x expanded by UndercoverClassicist (talk). Self-nominated at 18:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Alan Wace; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alan Wace/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 15:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to this in the next few days. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking it on -- appreciate, in advance, your time and comments. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:57, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ealdgyth -- thanks for your comments above. I've put still to do where I need to check a source: a few replies to the others, but most straightforwardly sorted. UndercoverClassicist T·C 18:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of these look good, just waiting on the ones you've marked to still do. Ealdgyth (talk) 22:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks -- probably won't be able to get to them for a few days, but it's on my radar for when I can. Appreciate your time so far. UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ealdgyth: I think everything's resolved, though you might want to take a look in particular at the last point. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changes look good - on the last point, I was hoping there was something out there that was able to clear up the confusion - but it doesn't appear there is. Can't write something that isn't supported by sources... Passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much obliged -- thank you for your time and work here. UndercoverClassicist T·C 14:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]