Talk:Flag of Columbus, Ohio

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 Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Current flag of Columbus, Ohio

• ... that the government of Columbus, Ohio inexplicably used one city flag design, even though a different one had already been approved? Source: "By at least as early as 1965, however, the city flag on display in council chambers was very different from the one adopted..." (American City Flags by Ted Kaye)
  • ALT1:... that the city flag of Columbus, Ohio is undergoing a redesign process due to its heavy use of Christopher Columbus imagery? Source: "The seven-person body motioned to move forward with a number of tasks — including finding a replacement for [Christopher Columbus'] statue, as well as redesigning the Columbus flag and seal — in tandem with that decision [removing Columbus' statue]." (Art Commissioners Reflect on Statue Removal, Flag Redesign and More by Taijuan Moorman, published on June 1, 2020)

Improved to Good Article status by Jordano53 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:04, 16 October 2020 (UTC).

Article was just promoted to GA, is long enough, is not featured in the news, appropriate inline citations given, provides citations for direct quotes. I think that alt 1 is much better than the first, but it is not stated explicitly in the article, can you work it, or a close paraphrasing, into the lead? No dispute templates, remains neutral, and the only plagiarism complaints from turnitin relate to the direct quotes and common phrases, so is good there as well. Overall, I very much support Alt 1 to be included as a DYK, it is interesting and timely. I request you add a close paraphrasing into the lead, though, so as to satisfy all requirements. Footlessmouse (talk) 08:36, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

• I am marking as DKY ready. Although I believe the statement should be worked into the lead, the information is already in the article; it is just phrased in a different way, so I believe it still qualifies. Footlessmouse (talk) 08:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
• Sorry, this is my first review, I forgot to mention the image is free from copyright restrictions, is highly relevant, appears in the article, and is high-enough quality. No alt is given, you may fix this as well, but considering the entire article serves as alt text for it, it does not seem as relevant as it is for most images.Footlessmouse (talk) 08:48, 17 October 2020 (UTC)