Template:Did you know nominations/Every family


 * 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 Allen3 talk 15:37, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Every family

 * ... that the 17th century English pirate Henry Every (pictured) is thought to be a descendant of the Every family?


 * Reviewed: Brigitte Kieffer

Created by Stowe Jowe (talk). Nominated by Jolly Janner (talk) at 23:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Article was created on January 4, 2016, and nominated on January 7. Hook is interesting and verified through a book with a reliable author. Good job.--12george1 (talk) 03:35, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Image license needs to be verified. Uploaded at Commons in 2005, it gives the source as "A woodcut showing pirate Henry Every that appears in Captain Charles Johnson's A General History of the Robberies and Murders of the most notorious Pyrates (London: Midwinter, 1725). Library of Congress." but gives no link to the Library of Congress.  A quick search of that book at the Library of Congress  shows one edition "New York : Lyons Press, c1998". There's probably been numerous editions over the centuries. Copyright license on the image needs to be looked at. — Maile  (talk) 17:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for bringing this to my attention. Unfortunately I cannot find an online source of the 1725 version of the book, so I am unable to verify whether this wood graving appeared in it. It is possible that the wood graving was made after the book, but the racist nature and wood graving technique would make it very unlikely to have been made recently. Anyway, what do you think of File:Henry Every.gif? It is backed up be dating to the 18th century per this source.  Jolly  Ω   Janner  19:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * There's a good chance both of these images are public domain, but it needs to be documented on Commons. The stickler on both of these is, while they are both claimed to be old, the uploaders didn't really list what is needed. And I welcome any editor who reads this to come up with a clearer explanation. File:Henry Every.gif says the uploader is the source of the work, but also says "The name of the author is unknown". The image is on the link you provided and says "The name of the author is unknown". Maybe both of them are public domain. I just think there needs to be something listed on the Commons upload that answers that question. And I certainly think there needs to be some DYK regular with experience on such matters to comment here.— Maile  (talk) 00:07, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I think I am going to give up on trying to find online sources for the images. May as well post the hook without the image.  Jolly  Ω   Janner  05:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, so I couldn't give up on this quite yet. I looked into the file history of the image and when it was originaly uploaded, there was no mention of the Library of Congress. This was added in 2011 by an anonymous user with no edit summary. It appears they were trying to help people find revision of the book. As the uploader had nothing to do with the Library of Congress, it's likely they got the book from elsewhere. Not sure if it's necessary to state where they got the book from.  Jolly  Ω   Janner  20:52, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * IMO, where the book came from is irrelevant by itself, but where the image came from should have a link or something saying where the uploader got it. It's whether or not there is an existing copyright on the image. And it may very well be fine to use.  Since neither of us has a definite answer to this, let's ping  who does a lot of image reviews and probably should be able to help clarify this for us. — Maile  (talk) 22:18, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There's a 1724 edition of the book available online here; it doesn't appear to contain this image. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * This book has a different title. File:Pg 003 - Engraving (bw).jpg, although not as interesting, should satisfy the requirements.  Jolly  Ω   Janner  23:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Good work I believe the second image is licensed. — Maile  (talk) 00:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)