Template:Did you know nominations/George Backhouse Witts


 * 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) 17:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

George Backhouse Witts

 * ... that George Backhouse Witts "read the Riot Act" on a hill in Gloucestershire?
 * ALT1:... that ...?
 * Note: "reading the riot act" is a phrase still common in British English to mean a stern warning.
 * Reviewed: Yong Mei

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 19:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC).


 * Thanks, I note your comments. I have removed the image from the nom. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I note your comments. I have removed the image from the nom. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I note your comments. I have removed the image from the nom. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg. Then I see no doubts on this one now. I was just looking at the image again. The first licence shouldn't be there, as the photographer isn't known. The second licence has three bullet points. The first doesn't apply, as the photograph has been used before, the second can't be claimed, because we just do not know if it was "made available to the public (e.g. by publication or display at an exhibition) more than 70 years ago", and the third is no good, because it is not "an artistic work other than a photograph". So that licence should not be there either. Good call. Moonraker (talk) 13:26, 1 May 2019 (UTC)