Template:Did you know nominations/Karl Frederik Kinch

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 01:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Karl Frederik Kinch

(

)

... that archaeologist Karl Frederik Kinch identified that a triumphal arch in Thessaloniki was dedicated to Roman Emperor Galerius? Source: https://journals.uio.no/CLARA/article/view/6689
- ALT1: ... that archaeologist Karl Frederik Kinch found a tomb, and discovered within a lost 3rd-century BCE painting of a Macedonian cavalaryman? Source: p. 189-190 of Makedonien - Europas første stormagt, which is available on Wikipedia Library at Project MUSE if you want to confirm yourself.
- ALT2: ... that archaeologist Karl Frederik Kinch identified the location of the philosopher Aristotle's hometown, Stagira? Source: p. 227 of Makedonien - Europas første stormagt, which is available on Wikipedia Library at Project MUSE if you want to confirm yourself. ("Det lykkedes Kinch at finde og identificere Aristoteles’ fødeby, Stageira")
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Heinrich Nidecker
- Comment: If there's a shortage of DYK hooks with images, there's a public domain portrait, but I dunno if it's neat enough.

Created by SnowFire (talk). Self-nominated at 08:28, 4 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Karl Frederik Kinch; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

First time conducting a review on something like this. Please bear with me.

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:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: It looks good to me, always good to have a second opinion when it comes down to it. I have never nominated something before, but I want to set some standards and do the QPQ portion early for my end, just so I get into the habit. This was a fascinating piece, since it tapped into a niche of Classical Greek scene that I have not read into before. ALT2 seems to be the most interesting, I highly recommend this one. ALT1 on the fresco despite being personally interested would seem generic compared to the Aristotle piece. NeverBeGameOver (talk) 05:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! I'm obviously biased, but I don't think you really need a second opinion on this, @NeverBeGameOver:. Plenty of people hesitantly start DYK reviewing with less controversial promotions, so it's probably fine. (And, in theory, if a promotion is really crazy, the promoter who moves the hook to the queue generally takes a short overall look and can flag a nomination as needing more work, although it's not good to depend on that of course.) That said, it's up to you.
As a side note, on your minor edit - this is a bit of a trap since it's not obvious, but the DYK expectation of one source per paragraph doesn't apply to the lead section per WP:LEADCITE. Just a random gotcha out there, and yes, lots of editors / readers don't know this guideline either - more an FYI deal. SnowFire (talk) 17:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Alrighty good to know! Sounds good. NeverBeGameOver (talk) 19:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)