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 97198 (talk) 08:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment: I hope I haven't made a mess while quoting the source, but I'm more than willing to enter it again, if that was the case. Oh, and just to clarify, I translated and re-adapted the original Italian quote, in order to make it clearer and smoother to read. I can't wait to get your feedback on my nomination!
Improved to Good Article status by Oltrepier (talk). Self-nominated at 22:20, 7 January 2023 (UTC).
Overall: @Oltrepier: Good article. Just want to mention but your qpq isn't a qpq since you didn't review the nomination. Rather, you just commented on it. Though you don't need a QPQ for this nom so your good regardless. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
@Onegreatjoke: Thank you so much for reviewing and approving my nomination: I didn't expect to pass the first step so quickly! Thanks for clarifying QPQ requirements, as well: I guess the reviewer is rather the first user to comment on the nomination, right? Finally, something I didn't mention before: the source I entered is already included in the nominated article (citation n° 6, to be precise). I don't know how relevant this might be, but still, I wanted to add it. I'm ready to get feedback on the hook now! Oltrepier (talk) 13:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
@Oltrepier: Good article. Just want to mention but your qpq isn't a qpq since you didn't review the nomination. Rather, you just commented on it. Though you don't need a QPQ for this nom so your good regardless. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)