Template:Did you know nominations/General Post Office, Zagreb
- The following discussion 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 19:08, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
General Post Office, Zagreb[edit]
- ... that the General Post Office in Zagreb has been featured on postage stamps of Croatia and Austria?
- Reviewed: Bill Whittle
Created/expanded by GregorB (talk). Self nom at 20:09, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
The article itself isn't bad, but it wasn't expanded fivefold in the last five days. --Երևանցի ասելիք կա՞ 03:42, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Forgot to point out that it was moved to article space on December 12 (which can be seen in the edit history), so it counts as a new article as of this date. GregorB (talk) 10:03, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't seem to understand your point. --Երևանցի ասելիք կա՞ 23:25, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- This article was developed as a userspace draft. On December 12 it was moved from its original location to its present title. So, for the purposes of DYK, it is considered to have been created as new on that date. Fivefold expansion does not come into play at all. Please see rule 1d. GregorB (talk) 12:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
- 1d rule says: "Articles that have been worked on exclusively in a user or user talk subpage or at articles for creation and then moved (or in some cases pasted) to the article mainspace are considered new as of the date they reach the mainspace." This only applies to articles that have not been created prior to copy-paste from the userspace, while this article was created on November 24, 2012 about 20 days before it's expansion. In other words, if it took you 20 days to work on an article on a userspace, it wouldn't be a problem, but as soon as the article was created this rule can't be applied. --Երևանցի ասելիք կա՞ 01:11, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- This article was developed as a userspace draft. On December 12 it was moved from its original location to its present title. So, for the purposes of DYK, it is considered to have been created as new on that date. Fivefold expansion does not come into play at all. Please see rule 1d. GregorB (talk) 12:19, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't seem to understand your point. --Երևանցի ասելիք կա՞ 23:25, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Forgot to point out that it was moved to article space on December 12 (which can be seen in the edit history), so it counts as a new article as of this date. GregorB (talk) 10:03, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) Yerevanci, moves on Wikipedia are very confusing because the only evidence that an article has been moved at all is the edit summary that says a move has taken place. The only other indication is that there is no change in the size of the article, and the diff should show no changes as well. It appears in the history file that the article was created way back on the first day, but it was the userspace article that was created then. In this case, GregorB created the article in the temp directory of his user account on November 24, 2012, built it up in userspace through December 12, 2012, and moved it to article space on that day. According to 1d, the article is therefore considered new by DYK as of December 12, since that's when the move took place, and that was the first time General Post Office, Zagreb appeared in article space. If you run DYKcheck, it helpfully tells you when an article was moved from userspace to articlespace, along with the current size of the article. It will also helpfully tell you about 5x expansion, but that's not relevant for new articles "created" within the past five days, which this is. What is relevant is the 3073 prose characters, over twice the minimum 1500. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:53, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, it is in fact very confusing, but from now on I will handle similar cases this much better.
The article is well-sourced, new enough and large enough as stated above. Good to go! And sorry for the delay, Gregor. --Երևանցի ասելիք կա՞ 02:54, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
