Template:Did you know nominations/Tornada (Occitan literary term)

 The following is an archived discussion of Tornada (Occitan literary term)'s DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Miyagawa (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2013 (UTC).

Tornada

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the tornada is the Occitan equivalent of the Old French envoi, the Galician-Portuguese finda, and the Italian congedo and commiato?

5x expanded by MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk). Self nom at 01:01, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• Reviewed Kreuzschule. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• The article has been expanded from 482 characters on December 31 to 2224 characters, a 4.6x expansion. Could you add more? Chris857 (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• Oh, I calculated a 5x word count from 72? words to 350+ and presumed that was adequate. More information added. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 20:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

• Now at 2353 characters, or a 4.88x expansion. Anything more that you can add? Chris857 (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

• Added more, but it's a push to get any more out of the limited source material on the topic! Hopefully, finally, this should be enough ... MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:22, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
• Using the provided tool, I calculate it to be ~2469 characters currently, which is over 2410 or the 5x expansion requirement. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 19:25, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Now that this is long enough, I will leave it to someone else to finish the review. My initial comment was mostly drive-by anyway. Chris857 (talk) 04:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

• Interesting article, although I would advise against your GAN nom—it's simply too short. Something around the length of Sangay is about the shortest work that could pass through a GA nom without issuance. ResMar 14:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

• My perspective is that the size of an article has to be judged in terms of its relative importance — per the GA criteria, the article addresses the main aspects of the topic without going into unnecessary detail, and therefore should be acceptable. Simply, there is nowhere else for the article to go in order to be more comprehensive. But hopefully I can fight my case if the issue arises at GAN. Thank you for your input and voice of support for the DYK. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 17:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)