Template:Did you know nominations/Armada Memorial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 PFHLai (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Armada Memorial[edit]

The Armada Memorial
The Armada Memorial
Francis Drake playing bowls
Francis Drake playing bowls

Moved to mainspace by Jolly Janner (talk). Self-nominated at 05:50, 26 January 2016 (UTC).

  • . Hook length verified. Hook fact verified on page 53 of reference 1 History of Plymouth by Richard Worth. ALT1 is also fine with the same fact as the original hook but a different picture. Article newness verified. The sentence in commemoration of the defeat of the Armada, it was customary for the bells of St Andrew's to ring a merry peal annually on the Saturday night preceding 25 July. is close to the one in reference 1 but since the book is from 1890 there are no copyright issues. No copyright issues were detected elsewhere. I note that in Worth's history there are more details regarding the monument including details of when its foundation stone was laid and its inauguration by the Duke of Edinburgh which could be added to enrich the article. Dr. K. 20:39, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your review, Dr K! And yes, I shamelessly paraphrased the text as it is out of copyright. Did you assess the images' eligibility? A closing reviewer may want to know whether they are able to be used. I believe the history section contains all that I could find from Worth on its inauguration. Jolly Ω Janner 20:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the correction. I was expecting the foundation stone details to be at the intro of the Architecture section and the inclusion of the detail escaped me. I struck the relevant comment. The two pictures are from Commons and the copyright looks fine and established as free under the appropriate Commons-compatible licences. Sorry for the bolding, but I wouldn't want the promoter to miss the detail about picture licensing. Just being cautious. Dr. K. 21:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)