Template:Did you know nominations/Massacre in Ciepielów

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Talk| 
 * 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 — Maile (talk) 23:27, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

{{DYK conditions}}

Massacre in Ciepielów

 * ... that the POW massacre in Ciepielów is the most infamous instance of the war crimes of the Wehrmacht committed during the invasion of Poland? Source: http://www.polska1918-89.pl/pdf/zbrodnie-wehrmachtu-na-jencach-polskich-we-wrzesniu-1939-roku,2028.pdf " Najbardziej nagłośniona została anonimowa relacja żołnierza niemieckiego i dołączone do niej zdjęcia dowodzące zbrodni popełnionej 8 września pod Ciepielowem na żołnierzach batalionu zbiorczego 74. Górnośląskiego Pułku Piechoty. W 1950 r. relację tę otrzymała Polska Misja Wojskowa w Monachium; wielokrotnie powielano ją w różnego rodzaju publikacjach i prasie. Właśnie ten mord, stale przypominany w peerelu z okazji kolejnych rocznic wybuchu wojny, jest dziś najpowszechniej kojarzonym obrazem zbrodni wojennej z września 1939 r."
 * Reviewed: Nozomi Nishida
 * Comment: Perhaps delay Main Page until the anniversary on the 8 September? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

5x expanded by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 07:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but unless we IAR, this does not meet the 5x expansion requirement. Before expansion began, the character count was 1500. As of the latest edit, it is 4200. It does not count to remove a chunk of text and then start counting the 5x expansion from there. Yoninah (talk) 11:45, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree, I think that removal of unreferenced / OR / irrelevant / otherwise problematic content should count. This motivates people to rewrite such articles to make them DYK eligible. Anyway, where do we draw the line? If some vandal inserts a chunk of gibberish to an article, you could argue that it still represents the 'character count' for 5x expansion...? I think we should follow the spirit, not the letter, of the rules. Wasn't this discussed at WT:DYK or something? Ping User:BlueMoonset. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:02, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Piotrus, WP:DYKSG is quite clear: Fivefold expansion is calculated from the previously existing article, no matter how bad it was (copyvios are an exception), no matter whether you kept any of it and no matter if it were up for deletion. As it goes on to say This may be a bad surprise, it's something that has come up many times in the past, with articles being rejected when the full 5x expansion was not done; it's one of the arguments that was made for adding new GAs to the mix, so that articles get another opportunity if it becomes prohibitive to make a 5x expansion. According to DYKcheck, the article was at 1450 prose characters prior to the June 13 edits, and is 4203 prose characters now, which means it needs another 3047 to reach the 5x level of 7250 prose characters. As Yoninah says, unless there's agreement to IAR—which you'd need to get at WT:DYK (and I am pessimistic about your chances there)—the additional material will need to be added if you wish this to run. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:52, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, give me a few days and I'll try to pad this out. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:52, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * My prose counter gives me 7352 B so we should be good now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:53, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Great job on the last-minute expansion, ! My Javascript counter has the new character count at 7451 char, just 49 characters shy of 5x expansion, which I'm certainly willing to overlook. Restoring tick per Hawkeye7's review. Yoninah (talk) 17:52, 7 September 2019 (UTC) |}}