Template:Did you know nominations/Beatriz Ferrer-Salat

Beatriz Ferrer-Salat

 * ... that Beatriz Ferrer-Salat is the "most successful dressage rider" in Spanish history?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Star Trek: The Next Generation (season 2)

Created by Dana boomer (talk). Self nominated at 19:14, 6 June 2013 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg very nice. all looks good. Pumpkin Sky   talk  21:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Actually, I find the hook to be too... subjective maybe?... for the main page. For example, I might argue that José Navarro Morenes was more successful, having won gold and silver at the Olympics (and 20 years apart at that!). Perhaps a slight tweak like "... that Beatriz Ferrer-Salat has been referred to as the "most successful dressage rider" in Spanish history?" might be more appropriate/in line with WP:NPOV? Canadian   Paul  22:05, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * But Morenes was a show-jumper...??? And, as the phrase is in quotation marks, rather than in Wikipedia's voice, I would think it obvious that this is a quote of how someone else described her, rather than a conclusion that Wikipedia came to. Dana boomer (talk) 23:39, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oops, for some reason I kept reading "dressage" as "equestrian". My bad. But I still don't seem the harm in making it 100% clear with a little extra addition. Just an observation, I don't really care either way, but I thought it could use an extra pair of eyes. Canadian   Paul  00:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The hook says what the ref says, perhaps add "according to..." to the hook. Pumpkin Sky   talk  01:09, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that "according to..." would just be adding trivia. If we have to add a qualifier, I'd prefer CanadianPaul's suggestion. I personally don't think either are necessary (if a reader has questions, they can go to the article, which is kind of the point of a DYK), but if others disagree, I won't be upset. Preference for the "has been referred to as...", if anything is added. Dana boomer (talk) 02:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Eh, I didn't mean to stir up any bother, I just happened to be reviewing this while PumpkinSky was, and the above was going to be my comment, but PS ended up posting first. I probably shouldn't have posted it, maybe I just wanted to get the thought out or something. Anyways, a third person has looked at it and disagrees, so that's good enough for me. No sense in wasting everyone's time holding things up here. Canadian   Paul  04:15, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, more eyes and thoughts are always good. Dana boomer (talk) 11:52, 9 June 2013 (UTC)