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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 17:04, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Portrait of Qalaherriaq, early 1850s.
Portrait of Qalaherriaq, early 1850s.

Created by Generalissima (talk). Self-nominated at 19:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Qalaherriaq; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough, long enough, well sourced, neutral and plagiarism free. The hook is cited, but I wonder if there are more interesting things to draw on? Maybe his connection to the Franklin exhibtion? Or the drawings he made. Also, I would love to see the portrait, or one of the other images added to the nomination - they are wonderful. The other thing I wondered, was whether you think it might be worth shifting some of the content about how his life was interpreted and recorded in a "Historiography" section or similar? I really enjoyed reading the article, thank you for starting it with such detail. Lajmmoore (talk)

(source: https://www.utpjournals.press/doi/full/10.3138/cart-2021-0012 pp. 247–248. ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Generalissima (talkcontribs)

  • Green tickY support ALT1 (I still think a historiography section would be really good - and would help the GA nomination) Lajmmoore (talk) 08:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 23:40, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll get to this in the next day or so. Ealdgyth (talk) 23:40, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[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) 18:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All these changes look good, passing now. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]