Template:Did you know nominations/Pair-house


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Pair-house

 * ... that the Scandinavian-influenced pair-house shows that some level of ethnic diversity was accepted in early Mormon society? Source: "The presence of the northern European pair-house type in Utah communities further reinforces the idea that a degree of ethnic identity was tolerated." (NRIS  - linked at bottom of infobox)
 * ALT1:... that the lineage of the pair-house goes back to the early Renaissance? Source: "The Utah pair-house finds its origins in the folk building traditions of Sweden and Norway during the 16th and 17th centuries." (same source)
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Port Cresson massacre

Created by MB (talk) and Doncram (talk). Nominated by MB (talk) at 14:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC).


 * Review below:


 * (Moved from review template) Technically, the source is there. However, for some reason, the information in the article is sourced to https://npgallery.nps.gov/nrhp/Download?path=/natreg/docs/All_Data.html, which is a landing page. epicgenius (talk) 20:47, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , you said you were passing the DYK but didn't give it the approval tick. MB 21:02, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I did not pass it yet; I only said that MOS is not a requirement for passing. Only the source issue needs to be fixed (or if there's a reason that the article uses the landing page, it should be explained). epicgenius (talk) 21:04, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , OK I didn't follow that. Both refs are to the same document - the NRHP nomination form. The NRHP infobox uses a template that given the NRHP number (64000873) that somehow creates a link directly to the document. With the landing page, you have to search manually so I suggested using the link in the infobox as a convenience. There may be a better way to reference the document in the body also but many NRHP articles are like this. MB 21:19, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I think I found the direct link (PDF), but if you do that, then the reference needs page numbers. As far as I know, this link will work every time because there is no login token. In the case the document does not work, you can also link to here.On the other hand, it's very hard to search for the document on the landing page, and I don't think readers will do that. It's better to just link to the source directly. epicgenius (talk) 21:25, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * , that is not exactly the problem. I don't want to repeat the reference. When the reference is used in the infobox, Template:NRISref creates the courtesy link to the document along with the reference, which has a url to the landing page. I'm not sure why it can't put the direct link to the document in the url, but this is done on thousands of NRHP articles and would require someone to modify the template to change. Regardless, the info is cited and the online link to the landing pages is better than an offline-only source which would also be acceptable. MB 21:46, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see now. For the source code it just uses default versions of NRISref. . I guess the solution is adding a few parameters, like   and it will create a direct link, like . epicgenius (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * epicgenius, that does seem to work. Reference now updated. Thanks for figuring this out. MB 22:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and Symbol confirmed.svg now this is good to go. epicgenius (talk) 22:11, 28 March 2018 (UTC)