Template:Did you know nominations/Godmersham Park


 * 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 Yoninah (talk) 16:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Godmersham Park

 * ... that Jane Austen's novel Mansfield Park was based on her brother's residence Godmersham Park, Kent, which she frequently visited? Historic England (MP based on GP), Parks and Gardens (Brother's residence, JA frequent visitor)
 * QPQ done - Template:Did you know nominations/Maybe You've Been Brainwashed Too
 * Comment: To appear on 15 September please - new £10 note featuring Jane Austen issued on this date. Moved into mainspace today.

Created by Mjroots (talk). Self-nominated at 19:04, 19 August 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg the article is long enough, is neutral, contains no close paraphrasing or copyvio (2%), the hook is neutral, short enough, interesting, is properly sourced with an inline source citation, the article itself is adequately sourced and written in adequate English. QPQ provided. Good for me to go on September 15. Not sure about the "which she was a frequent visitor to...", maybe is better "where she was a frequent visitor"? or "which she frequently visited"? Elisa.rolle (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Changed to "which she frequently visited". Mjroots (talk) 13:07, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg good to go for me now. Elisa.rolle (talk) 13:23, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this for the requested date, but the QPQ is hardly complete. Aside from verifying the newness of the nomination, the review should explicitly confirm that the five main DYK criteria have been met. Since that review somehow was promoted, do you have another to offer? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:23, 9 September 2017 (UTC)


 * As the review was accepted, I don't see the need to review another article - the contract has been fulfilled. The article in question was a recently promoted GA, so it is pretty much implicit that the criteria have been met. I am an infrequent contributor to DYK nowadays, so I will take note of my error, and endeavour to do a fuller QPQ in the future. Mjroots (talk) 20:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, thank you. Please note that GA is not DYK; we need to check each article against the DYK criteria, which are not always checked in the GA review process. I'll WP:IAR here.
 * I'm just reading the article through before promoting it. I don't understand this run-on sentence; perhaps a period or two would help here:
 * Wings, joined to the main block by set-back two-storey links, extend to either side, of brick, both of five bays and two storeys on the north front, but one of five bays and two storeys, the other a single-storey but double-height orangery of three bays on the south front. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:36, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I've tweaked the description, using more sentences and adding in a missing ref. Mjroots (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks. But now I notice that there's no inline cite for the hook fact :( Yoninah (talk) 23:05, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * - added in one from The Times. Although offline, it is obvious that the fact is referenced by the title of the article. Mjroots (talk) 06:11, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Thank you. Offline hook ref AGF and cited inline. Restoring tick per Elisa.rolle's review. Yoninah (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2017 (UTC)