Template:Did you know nominations/Ashbridge Estate
- 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) 19:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Ashbridge Estate[edit]
Jesse Ashbridge house, built 1854
... that the Ashbridge Estate (pictured) is the only property in the history of Toronto to be occupied by the same family for more than 200 years?Source: [1]: "The Jesse Ashbridge House so named for the Ashbridge family, the only family in Toronto to have lived continuously for two centuries on land they settled." Also historical plaque: "This property was home to one family for two centuries."
Improved to Good Article status by Ivanvector (talk). Self-nominated at 17:12, 24 February 2017 (UTC).
- Reviewed: Nyssa spatulata
Article was promoted to GA status on 21 Feb. Long enough, within policy. Hook is short enough, interesting, and covered by the Historic Places ref (which loads for me). QPQ is done. Picture looks good. Overall, good to go! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
@Ivanvector: I was going to promote this when I realised that the hook mentions "only" and refers to the time when the property became a Historic Place in 1972; this fact is not necessarily still true. Could you propose a hook variant to reflect this? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:40, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Cwmhiraeth: I'm not sure what you mean. The family settled the land in 1794, only a year after the town was first established; they donated the property to the Ontario Heritage Trust in 1972 but continued living on it until 1997. The source which says "only" was authored in 2008, at a time when it would be mathematically possible by 15 years for there to have been another family continuously occupying land in Toronto for 200 years. It's not necessarily still true, but I think if I were to change it to "first" or something like that then it would imply that there have been others, and I don't know whether that's true or not. I think following the source is better. On the other hand I could change it to something like "to be occupied by the same family that originally settled the land more than 200 years later?" and then the source confirms it. What do you think? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:04, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- Here's a couple variants:
- ALT0a: ... that the Ashbridge Estate (pictured), settled in 1794, stayed in the same family for more than 200 years?
- ALT0b: ... that descendants of the family who settled Toronto's Ashbridge Estate (pictured) were still living on the same property over 200 years later?
- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:55, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- Either of those would overcome the difficulty I pointed out. Let's see if @Mike Peel: will approve one or both of the new hooks and replace his tick. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:41, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- Good catch with the temporal issue, @Cwmhiraeth. Either of @Ivanvector's replacement hooks look good to me, perhaps ALT0b is the better one of the two. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
