Template:Did you know nominations/Shumen fortress


 * 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 97198 (talk) 03:28, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Shumen fortress

 * ... that the Shumen fortress (pictured) was invaded during the late 14th century by the Ottomans, who ransacked and destroyed it?


 * Reviewed: The first of the three articles here Template:Did you know nominations/Church of England churches in Wales

Created by Nvvchar (talk). Self-nominated at 12:37, 28 April 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg : One source says the fortress was gutted in 1444, and the other says late 14th century. Isn't that a contradiction? Random86 (talk) 21:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. I have added 1444 and clarified in the lead with a ref and also in History section. Nvvchar . 06:15, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm new to DYK, but it still seems too contradictory to me. Shouldn't the lead and history section say the same thing? It's confusing that the lead says "14th century (1444 is also mentioned)", and then the history section says the fortress was destroyed after a battle that took place in 1444. I don't know if you saw this, but it supports the 1444 date (quote: "archaeological research reveals it wasn’t demolished by Ottomans when they conquered it"). Random86 (talk) 07:08, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for further review and the reference. I had seen this reference but did not use it referred to a travel site. Your point is well taken and the date 1444 referred in the history section is correct. I have modified the lead accordingly and suggesting an Alt1 hook as:
 * ALT1: ... that the Shumen fortress (pictured) was destroyed and deserted in 1444 after the battle between Władysław III of Poland and the Ottomans?  Nvvchar . 09:09, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 is good to go. Article is new enough, long enough, neutral, and has inline citations. No copyvio detected. The new hook is accurate, cited and interesting, and the image is free and used in the article. QFQ also done. Random86 (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg I'm sorry,, but I don't see the part about it being gutted or deserted in either source (p. 91 given in the lead, p. 89 given in the history). BTW the lead doesn't need a cite if it's cited below. Yoninah (talk) 23:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I missed it. I have added the required reference. Also deleted the references in the lead as they are cited in the body. Thanks. Nvvchar . 12:48, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you. Restoring tick per Ramdom86's review. Yoninah (talk) 15:11, 8 May 2016 (UTC)