Template:Did you know nominations/El Drago Milenario


 * 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 StudiesWorld (talk) 17:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

El Drago Milenario, Parque del Drago

 * ... that El Drago Milenario (pictured), located in Parque del Drago, Tenerife, is said to be a thousand years old?
 * ALT1: ... that El Drago Milenario (pictured), located in Parque del Drago, Icod de los Vinos, is one of the symbols of Tenerife?
 * ALT2: ... that El Drago Milenario (pictured), located in Parque del Drago, Tenerife, is the largest and oldest known specimen of Dracaena draco?
 * Reviewed: Molniya orbit
 * Comment: This is a double DYK for the specimen and the park that it is located in. The age of El Drago is controversial, and I haven't managed to find many good refs that talk about it: ALT1 avoids the issue if needed.

Created by Mike Peel (talk). Self-nominated at 19:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC).


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Interesting tree which I saw! On good source, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. - Suggestions: Give the species name in English, perhaps also translate the other names (or say named after what). Perhaps just mention that it was pictured on the bill, without the image which shows little of the tree and "sandwiches" the text. For a hook, you could also use the "largest and oldest". Link Tenerife? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:59, 27 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol voting keep.svg I approve the park also, Spanish AGF, but how about expanding the lead a bit, and also translating Spanish names? It's borderline long enough, and the specific prices which make it long enough actually no so interesting in detail. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reviews! I've made various tweaks to the articles as suggested, and I've suggested ALT2 above. How does that look now? BTW, if we can wait a few days, then I can upload a set of new photos of the tree and park. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:42, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Fine, thank you, and say explicitly that ALT2 is also approved. It's up to promoters now to wait. The image is fine, and licensed. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. My new photos are up, and I've replaced the ones in the park article, but I think took a better photo of the tree itself than I did so I'm leaving that as-is. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:39, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! What do you think of dropping the map from the tree article, to focus on the images? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * To avoid "sandwiching", how about a gallery in the park article. Compare Unionskirche, Idstein, where I had more images than I could comfortably put in the text. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I quite like maps (useful to understand where something is!), and I'm not a fan of galleries (they tend to indicate that an article has too many pictures in it, or needs expanding/a table adding). Personally I think the sandwiching is fine, but if it's an issue then I can remove an image. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:12, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Please don't remove an image, - do it your way, fine. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:06, 30 April 2019 (UTC)