Template:Did you know nominations/Miroslav Komárek
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:58, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Miroslav Komárek[edit]
- ... that Czech linguist Miroslav Komárek spent his entire six-decade academic career at Palacký University in Olomouc? Source: Hirschová (1994): "Po promoci začal působit na na FF UP a této instituci zůstal věrný celý svůj profesionální život." = After graduation he began to work at FF UP (= Filozofická Fakulta Univerzity Palackého = Faculty of Arts at Palacký University) and stayed loyal to this institution for his entire professional life // Janečka (2014) p100: "Miroslav Komárek zůstal věrný olomoucké filozofické fakultě více než šest desetiletí" = Miroslav Komárek stayed loyal to the Faculty of Arts in Olomouc for more than six decades.
Created by Filelakeshoe (talk). Self-nominated at 11:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC).
- Reviewed: Topolnița Cave. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 12:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
interesting life and work, on few sources in Czech. How about at least one additional in English, such as this? How about the image? History: to my knowledge, in 1943, Olomouc was Olmütz, and you could link to Gymnasium (Germany). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for the source! I expanded the bit about Jan Gebauer from it. In 1943 Olomouc was in occupied Moravia (not in the annexed areas), since this is a bio of a clearly Czech person I have put it in brackets next to that one mention using the "Gdansk vote" guideline. Not sure if a link to Gymnasium (Germany) is appropriate though, we tend not to call Nazi occupied areas "Germany" in articles AFAIK. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 16:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- [arrgh, edit conflict while I was writing this review! There aren't enough open DYK noms anymore ...] Article creation date and filing date okay. Article length okay at 1884 B (303 words) readable prose size. Article is neutral and sourced. Sources are in Czech so I don't think copyvio is an issue. The hook is neutral and the hook fact is verified by a machine translation I did of one of the sources. The hook isn't that interesting, but it will do. (To address another possible point of concern, although I have no knowledge in this academic field, I've looked around a bit online, including in a few English-language sources, and I do think the academic notability criteria are satisfied here.) QPQ is done.
- However, I do have a concern on the image used in the article. This looks like a professionally taken portrait by a commercial photographer that was used by the university and/or the professor. The date it was supposedly taken is a few days after the subject's passing. The image contains no jpeg metadata that would indicate it was taken by the uploader's camera. The uploader has no other history of uploads besides one younger photo of the same professor, same story. So both these photos seem likely to be a copyvio, unless the author of the article knows something about them. Wasted Time R (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- Now that you say that I agree with you on the pic. I know nothing about it, I just took it from the cs.wiki article. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 16:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
from me, thanks for adding. Wasted Time R, sorry about the edit conflict, - when I plan a longer review, I first say "Will review". This was short, so I didn't. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
now from me too. No fault on the conflict – I thought about marking it for review as well but like you thought I'd be finished with it soon enough. Wasted Time R (talk) 17:13, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
