- 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The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 09:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Normandy massacres
Private Charles Doucette, who was one of the first victims of the Normandy massacres
- ... that during the Battle of Normandy, one out of every seven Canadian soldiers killed June 6–11, 1944, were murdered after surrendering? Source: One out of every seven Canadian soldiers killed between June 6–11 were murdered after surrendering — a figure that rises to one in five if the range is reduced to June 7–11, when Canadian units started engaging with elements of the 12th SS Panzer Division.[1]}
Created by CplKlinger (talk). Self-nominated at 20:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- no - Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- Other problems: - A single source maintenance template was placed on the article on April 4th and it is valid.
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
Image eligibility:
- Freely licensed: - photo's attribution is somewhat unclear. It was originally published in a Canadian history blog without apparent editorial oversight. Though its public domain status labeling over on Commons looks good, I am concerned about its origin and its labeling/title/name/ownership.
- Used in article:
- Clear at 100px:
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
Though many aspects of this DYK? nom are good - interesting hook/no copyvios/length is fine/QPQ is NA for this editor/etc - the article in its present state is ineligible for DYK? as it now has a single source maintenance template (placed on April 4th). The template is valid/appropriate — out of the article's 98 inline citations, 95 are to a single source. Shearonink (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time to respond. I have one last final due this week, and after I submit it I'll work on the citations. The book provides extensive footnotes, so it shouldn't be too difficult for me to track down alternative sources. CplKlinger (talk) 23:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- @CplKlinger: Any updates on this? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:48, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
The nominator hasn't edited in almost a month and despite a ping has been unable to return. As the issues remain unaddressed, the nomination is now marked for closure as stale, without prejudice against the nomination continuing if another editor decides to adopt this and resolve the sourcing issues. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Sorry about that, I was away on a trip for a few weeks. Basically, I tried to add more sources but ran into some technical difficulties. I'm still learning as I go, so it'll probably take me a little while yet to sort this out. I am grateful that the nomination will be considered if/when these issues are solved, and apologize for the inconvenience. CplKlinger (talk) 02:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
on hold pending this being sorted out. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- @CplKlinger: The nomination is now one of the oldest remaining ones. As it has already been several weeks since the review and the issues remain unsolved, please let us now if you will be able to address the concerns within a reasonable timeframe (around a week or two at most given the circumstances). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: I thought you closed it on the 22nd. I'm fine with it being closed, I understand the need to keep the list clean. As I said before, I don't have the research or editing knowhow to sort through the technical difficulties I encountered within a short timeframe, and I think it's safe to assume nobody else will step in to address it either. So go ahead and do what you need to do! CplKlinger (talk) 09:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I see. I guess I'll close the nomination as withdrawn then. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: I thought you closed it on the 22nd. I'm fine with it being closed, I understand the need to keep the list clean. As I said before, I don't have the research or editing knowhow to sort through the technical difficulties I encountered within a short timeframe, and I think it's safe to assume nobody else will step in to address it either. So go ahead and do what you need to do! CplKlinger (talk) 09:34, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- @CplKlinger: The nomination is now one of the oldest remaining ones. As it has already been several weeks since the review and the issues remain unsolved, please let us now if you will be able to address the concerns within a reasonable timeframe (around a week or two at most given the circumstances). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ Margolian, Howard (1998). Conduct unbecoming : the story of the murder of Canadian prisoners of war in Normandy. Toronto [Ont.]: University of Toronto Press. p. 123. ISBN 978-1-4426-7321-2. OCLC 431557826.