Template:Did you know nominations/Parada Równości


 * 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:49, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Parada Równości

 * ... that the Equality Parade (pictured) in Warsaw, Poland, held since 2001, is the oldest pride parade in a former European Communist bloc country?
 * ALT1: ... that the ban on organizing Warsaw's Equality Parade (pictured) endorsed by then-mayor and later president of Poland, Lech Kaczyński, has been deemed illegal by the European Court of Human Rights?
 * Reviewed: Mallica Reynolds

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self nominated at 10:12, 7 May 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg "Caused some controversies? But how? Also the citation style needs to be fixed up; two are bare URL's, another cites Archive.org directly (should point to the original URL, but use archivedate and archiveurl instead; If the original URL is dead, put  in it too) and this style of citation should have the actual name of the site in the work field rather than the domain name.  ViperSnake151  Talk  04:37, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol delete vote.svg Issues unaddressed after 21 days. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * In the interests of helping to clear the DYK noms review backlog, and because this nom has apparently been abandoned but could be saved, here is another review:
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Review for original hook: New enough (for 7 May) and long enough. Original hook checks out with online citation #1 in English. Hook image and article images are free. QPQ OK. Issues: (1) Citation #25 is dead (it is redundant anyway because online citation #26 supports the same statement). (2) Three of the citations are formatted as bare url's but this can be easily addressed by another editor, and it does not disrupt the function of the article and citations, so this is a minor issue. (3) The two citations linked to Archive.org still work as citations so this is a minor issue. (4) Regarding the question above about "caused some controversies", Google Translate shows that the answer is contained in the citation. Apparently the 2010 march was privately organised and required an entry fee, and the "controversy" was about that - so that information can be added in quickly by any editor. Summary: Issues 1-4 are minor and could be quickly and easily sorted by any contributor to this page (except for me because editing the article would invalidate my review). This nom is good to go (and meanwhile could somebody please deal with the above minor issues?) Thank you.--Storye book (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * As the creator, I find your analysis on spot. I think it would be fine for you to edit the article to improve those issues post facto, as in - now that your review is done. If you'd like, we can ask for a 3O on this, but as the creator, I think it would be totally fine if you'd go and fix the issues you noted (I think the refs are fixed, so it's just adding the clarification about the type of controversies, and yes, you are right about what they were about). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your positive comments, and for your request that I edit the article. However I am already stretched between an effort to help clear the DYK review backlog, and urgent editing of articles that I created. You could easily do the edits yourself; for example in issue (1) above, all you have to do is delete citation #25. --Storye book (talk) 08:55, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That citation works for me so I don't think we need to remove it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Citation #25 is working now - thank you. To admin: the article is still good to go.--Storye book (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2014 (UTC)