Template:Did you know nominations/Philip of Oldcoates


 * 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 PFHLai (talk) 04:25, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Philip of Oldcoates

 * ... that the chronicler Roger of Wendover called the 12th-century English nobleman Philip of Oldcoates one of King John of England's "evil counsellors"?


 * ALT1:... that the 12th century English nobleman Philip of Oldcoates was called one of King John of England's "evil counsellors" by the chronicler Roger of Wendover?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Isopogon anemonifolius
 * Comment: Other hook suggestions welcome.

Created by Ealdgyth (talk). Self-nominated at 16:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC).


 * Comment Review under way. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 16:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Review Symbol confirmed.svg New article, timely nominated. Meets core policies and guidelines, and in particular: is neutral; cites sources with inline citations; is free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism.  DYK nomination was timely and article is easily long enough.  Every paragraph is cited. No copyright violations or too close paraphrasing.  In passing, I note that I did not have access to the offline sources and not access to those that are "subscription required."  As to those sources, I WP:AGF.  Earwig's copy violation detector: Philip of Oldcoates report gives it a clean bill. Hooks are hooky enough, I think, and relate directly to the essence of the article.  I cleaned up the citations. It is interesting, decently neutral, and appropriately cited. QPQ done (but review is incomplete), although article is not yet promoted (not required).  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 16:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You didn't "clean up" the citations, you changed the citation style. I posted about it on the talk page, but you may want to investigate WP:CITEVAR, which strongly discourages such changes without discussion. Please kindly change it back. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Your citation style sucked. Revert it if you like.  Casting pearls ...  Change it back if you like, as I won't.  This was better, but you don't care much about readers, apparently.  I did the review, but I can take that back too. Happy editing.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:04, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * This has been extensively discussed at the talk page, and has nothing to do with the DYK, which still looks fine to me.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎</b>) 18:07, 11 January 2016 (UTC)