Template:Did you know nominations/Collecchio, Battle of Collecchio

Collecchio, Battle of Collecchio
Created/expanded by Aymatth2 (talk), Dr. Blofeld (talk), Ipigott (talk). Nominated by Dr. Blofeld (talk) at 14:53, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ... that Brazilian and German forces came to heads during the Battle of Collecchio in Collecchio, Italy during April 1945?



Reviewed: Jade Neilsen, Brittany Elmslie


 * How about a more compact and less informative tagline, separating the Collecchios?: Aymatth2 (talk) 02:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT1... that in the Battle of Collecchio, Brazilians fought Germans in Italy at Collecchio?


 * I think the following is a more appropriate level of intrigue. What do you think?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ALT2... that in the Battle of Collecchio, which took place in Collecchio, Italy during April 1945, Brigadier General Euclides Zenóbio da Costa created a mobile force with 606 jeeps and 676 trucks?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * If people like this alternate hook, the length, date and refs pass.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't feel strongly, but think the intriguing thing is that Brazilians fought Germans in Italy, and not just on the soccer pitch. ALT2 is a bit long, and the mobile force was formed a few days earlier. Still, the general did have an interesting name... Aymatth2 (talk) 11:30, 26 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg I much prefer the idea in the original hook as modified by ALT1. I could accept the original hook but would change "came to heads" to "fought each other." I think the interesting aspect of this battle is that Brazilians fought Germans in Italy during WWII. In that regard, I would also add "during World War II" to ALT1 after "Battle of Collechio." ALT2 does not identify the general or the force as Brazilian. The Battle article is new, is long enough, is quite interesting, is well sources, is well written, is neutral, is free of copyright violations, plagiarism or policy concerns - in fact some of the sources are U.S. Government sources and others have text and information obviously taken from those sources. The original hook and ALT1 are interesting, supported by citations and well within the length limit. QPQ is done. No image. Side comment: I changed the name of the major in the infobox to conform with the text. The infobox name is taken from one of the sources, but it is wrong; the text is right. The source confused the similar name of the major with the famous bridge over the Rhine.
 * So ALT3 would be: :... that in the Battle of Collecchio during World War II, Brazilians fought Germans in Italy at Collecchio?
 * I don't see how Collecchio qualifies as an article to be included. It already existed and was only expanded about 1.5x during a recent 10-day period during which the Battle article was written and posted for DYK. I would take the bold font off of that.
 * In summary, I think the original hook and ALT1 are both ok but I would slightly modify each of them as state above as to the hook or as stated in ALT3 as to ALT1; with ALT3 being my most preferred alternative. Good to go on either of the two hooks, as modified or not, but with no bold on Collecchio. Since a choice is to be made on the final wording of the hook, I would prefer that the nominators make the final choice on that rather than simply saying my amended version is the best. I will leave them a message. Donner60 (talk) 22:15, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't understand challenge of Collecchio. this version of the article was 367 characters of readable prose until editing started on July 12. The current version reached 3394 characters on July 16.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:44, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with TonyThe Tiger that Collecchio qualifies on size (I am neutral on this: Blofeld and Ipigott expanded it, not me, and then Blofeld suggested I might want to start the battle article). The DYK check tool shows 5x expansion starting from 12 July.  It was strictly a stub before.  I am fine with ALT3, which I just bolded, and think it is better than ALTs 0-2. Aymatth2 (talk) 00:36, 28 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg You are right about Collecchio, it qualifies. I looked at the history but failed to look carefully at the previous article. Most of the bytes in the previous version were taken up by the infobox and map in the box. The prose text has been expanded well over 5x. I should have been more careful and not judged the increase just on the increased bytes in the history. Sorry. So ALT3 is the choice and it is ok to go as far as I am concerned. Both articles qualify and should be included as bold for the DYK hook. Donner60 (talk) 01:04, 28 July 2012 (UTC)