Template:Did you know nominations/Symbols of Francoism

Symbols of Francoism
Created/expanded by ECPowell90 (talk). Self nom at 13:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ... that the 2007 Spanish Historical Memory Law mandated the removal of the symbols of Francoism from public buildings?



A good translation of an interesting article. No problem with date or length. AGF on offline sources. A spot-check of online ones shows no problem. The article could use a few more sources - but presumably these were missing from the original. Nothing seems controversial in the unsourced content. But, a quibble, the fact in the hook is not backed up by an external source. Add that, and it is good to go. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:26, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I found several online sources that could be helpful to the article creator:
 * BBC news story from October 31 2007, tells about the legislation that passed that day (in the lower house)
 * Guardian news story from 3 November 2007 about the initial passage of the legislation
 * BBC news story from November 2007, has a lot of information about the legislation, which at the time had passed the lower house, but not the Senate
 * Telegraph news story from 2010 about some effects of the law
 * BBC news story from 2011, about Franco memorials; contains a short statement about the 2007 law --Orlady (talk) 03:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Orlady has added a source for the hook, with other improvements, and I have tidied and added sources for much of the other content - although not yet all. I do not see anything to be concerned about.  Although Franco is perhaps still controversial, the plaques, statues, monuments and so on from his regime simply exist, and are steadily being removed.  But this article needs fresh eyes. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks--as so often--to the good work of Orlady. Drmies (talk) 03:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * One more thing: I tweaked the hook, not in a substantial way. Also, some paragraphs lack a citation at the end, but considering the size and scope of this article I don't find this to be problematic at all; it will be dealt with in a GA review, no doubt. This is an occasion where one of the DYK rules can be broken. The alternative is to remove some of those paragraphs or combine them, and that will be no improvement. Drmies (talk) 03:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)