Template:Did you know nominations/Dieter Bortfeldt


 * 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  S ven M anguard   Wha?  16:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Dieter Bortfeldt

 * ... that Dieter Bortfeldt, who was an expert in detecting forged stamps, won fifteen gold medals for his displays of the postal history of Colombia?
 * Reviewed: Asyla

Created by Philafrenzy (talk), Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 22:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg The section Expertisation does not have any sources. Otherwise, it is good to go. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 16:52, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've added a source to that section. Edwardx (talk) 17:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * While there is a source there, the section has two abbreviated organization names, A.I.E.P[.] and F.I.A.F., and no wikilinks for them. If you can't wikilink, then at least give the full names of the organizations. Otherwise, a casual reader will be lost amidst the letters, with no idea what is going on (or what "issued his own certificates" means in this context, for that matter). "Expertisation" is bad enough, since it's a specialist word that I thought was simply bad English until I looked it up. Finally, I'm not entirely sure the hook is supported in the article: the article mentions 15 gold medals for Postal History and Papel Sellado, while the hook is just talking about postal history. If Papel Sellado is part of postal history, then the article needs to make this clear, since the wording makes them seem two separate things. Once all this is fixed, I think we'll need a new review: the original one doesn't give any idea as to what was checked, so I have to assume, given what I just found, that other things such as neutrality and close paraphrasing were not checked, since the lack of article/hook clarity wasn't seen. I'd frankly like to see more sourcing; a few of the paragraphs have extended segments of information without any sourcing at the end, making one wonder where the information on the Chicago gold medal and the various COLOMPHIL claims came from. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Alt: ... that Dieter Bortfeldt, who was an expert in detecting forged stamps, won fifteen gold medals for his displays of the philately of Colombia?
 * Changed to philately since that encompasses both postal history and Papel Sellado (stamped paper) which is a form of revenue philately. Also improved the referencing. Take another look please. Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:31, 5 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Alt hook approved; sourced to offline source (AGF). DYKcheck shows 1738 prose characters; article created on April 20, two days before nomination. Article sourcing in all paragraphs, spotcheck of the online sources reveals no close paraphrasing, article seems neutral. Original hook struck per previous post. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:25, 18 May 2014 (UTC)