Template:Did you know nominations/Vajunites

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 Fuebaey (talk) 13:29, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Vajunites

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that Baiounitai were one of the Slavic tribes that established a military alliance led by Chatzon and besieged the Byzantine city of Thessaloniki in the mid-610s?

• Reviewed: Prosphorion Harbour diff

Created by Antidiskriminator (talk). Self nominated at 09:44, 9 October 2014 (UTC).

• Comment I've made some corrections. For one thing, the siege did not last for two years, but 614-16 is the approximate period when it took place, the leader was not Hacan but Chatzon, etc. I've made several changes to the article as well, not least of which is the name, so Antidiskriminator might wish to revise the nomination. Constantine ✍ 10:08, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Constantine. This period was not in the focus of my interest and I thought about asking you to check this article before I nominated it. I of course approve your changes. Thanks and all the best.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

• Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:53, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Invalid status "agf" - use one of "y", "?", "maybe", "no" or "again"

3family6, I'm not sure where this template checklist came from, but since it doesn't automatically display the crucial tick icon that everyone looks for to see whether the nomination has passed (or other icon if it doesn't), its use can be problematic. As a workaround, if you put the appropriate icon at the beginning of the comments field, it appears to show the icon at the beginning of the "Overall" section, which seems appropriate. Please add the icon as soon as you can. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:14, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't know why it does that. I've added the tick mark.--¿3family6 _contribs 22:17, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

ThaddeusB, you created the template. Could you comment on what I did wrong here?--¿3family6 _contribs 22:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

@3family6: you put "agf" as the status, which the template doesn't recognize. To get the agf tick, it expects you to put "yes" or equivilent in the status field and "agf" in the hookcited field. I could change this... Thank for using "my" template. I seem to recall there was a couple things I intended to do to improve it, but didn't get to before I went on break (only returning a week or two ago). Now I'm inspired to look into it again. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:39, 24 November 2014 (UTC)