Template:Did you know nominations/Freycinet Map of 1811

I do not recall starting the article about the Map by Louis de Freycinet. It is over half a DECADE AGO. I do recall giving a talk jointly with Rupert Gerritsen on the subject of THAT map in the National Library of Australia in 2011. It is after all about Australian history. Rupert Gerritsen died 2013. I maintain the web page www.australiaonthemap.org.au/landingslist .THERE... A ref to the Freycinet Map is behind 1811 on that list. What do you want to do? This might have been a Gerristen text. Re-Write the article again and make a Wiki-entry of it? I am currently working on the new entry on Jan Hendrik Scheltema. That is a developing page and much information still has to be added. Cheers Peter Reynders Peter Reynders (talk) 12:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Freycinet Map of 1811

 * ... that in 1811, French navigator Louis de Freycinet drew and published the first map to show the full outline of Australia (pictured)?
 * Comment: I've left a note on the authors' respective usertalkpages and asked for more footnotes in the article. --PFHLai (talk) 04:47, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Created/expanded by Robert.johnson27453 (talk), Peter Reynders (talk). Nominated by PFHLai (talk) at 04:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)




 * Symbol possible vote.svg The nominator has submitted more than 5 DYKs. They need to review an article before this goes further. --LauraHale (talk) 22:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Please be reminded that the QPQ requirement is meant for self-noms. I am not nominating an article written by me. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 04:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg PFHLai is correct; QPQ is not required here. Other work is needed, however. Article is new enough and long enough. Large chunks of it are not supported by inline citations, however. This includes much of the "Background - The Baudin Expedition" section and all of the section "Commemoration of the Map's 200th anniversary". The hook is interesting, but the hook fact is not supported by a citation in the lead section where it appears and it is not clearly stated in the main text where a possibly-relevant citation is given. Sources appear to be offline, so they cannot be checked. I also note that there are a few inappropriate external links in the article text. --Orlady (talk) 15:21, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, if the new Wikipedians don't come back to finish the article, let's not worry about this nom. --PFHLai (talk) 02:27, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Rather a shame since it's an interesting topic, but the article clearly doesn't qualify for DYK in its current state. Prioryman (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2012 (UTC)