Template:Did you know nominations/Virgin and Child (Sirani)


 * 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) 06:01, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Virgin and Child (Sirani)

 * ... that Elisabetta Sirani's painting Virgin and Child (pictured) was selected for Christmas Holiday Stamp series in October 1994 for the United States Postal Service?

Created by JeBonSer (talk). Self-nominated at 19:59, 1 March 2019 (UTC).


 * Hi - the DYK check states this article isn't long enough - It's only 1449 characters in length. The prose for the most part isn't inline cited. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski  (talk • contribs) 12:37, 4 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg Unfortunately, this article has some very severe issues. The first is that the entire "Description" section is uncited, and its prose is highly problematic: ungrammatical, repetitive, and reads as if it were pieced together from various sources without regard to whether the sentences are workable. The entire "Legacy" section was copied directly from the Elisabetta Sirani article without credit, which is against Wikipedia rules—see copying within Wikipedia for what must be done when copying material from another article. Also, the description sourcing must be supplied and its prose greatly improved if this nomination is to succeed. Here's an improved phrasing for the hook:
 * ALT1: ... that Elisabetta Sirani's painting Virgin and Child (pictured) was selected for the United States Postal Service's Christmas Holiday Stamp series in 1994? —BlueMoonset (talk) 18:22, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Nominator hasn't edited in two weeks and never responded, he also hasn't edited the article at all since last month. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Unfortunately, as the nominator never responded in this page and hasn't edited the article since he created it and nominated it, coupled with the fact that he hasn't edited in over two weeks, unless another editor is willing to adopt this, I am now marking this for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:42, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Quick comment: the nominator has just added refimprove and copyedit tags to the article. I'm not sure if this means this DYKN should be disqualified or it's a sign that this should be put on hold until the issues are sorted out. Please leave a comment here explaining your edits, thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:52, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It should probably be noted than an article that was already too short is now even shorter: 1287 prose characters. There's no point putting an article on hold unless the nominator specifically requests it here. A copy edit is still badly needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It should also be noted that the nominator has never responded and in fact appears to have never actually replied to any messages left on their talk page. This makes it unlikely that they will ever respond here. I will give then a final message to respond here by Sunday, but if there is no reply forthcoming, I will close this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:20, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ References improved
 * : Prose & grammar
 * Number of prose characters
 * – Je Bon Ser  (talk &#124; sign) 05:40, 5 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg The article is now long enough, but the prose remains a problem. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:00, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Is the article text still problematic? It looks fine to me for the most part. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't be - I've edited a bit & removed the tag. Let me know if it is still too short. Johnbod (talk) 20:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The article currently has 2199 prose characters according to DYKcheck, more than enough to qualify at DYK for length purposes. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:09, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: the copying of the original Legacy section from the Siriani article still needs to be acknowledged on the article's talk page before the nomination is approved, perhaps with the "copied" template. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:18, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅.  Je Bon Ser  (talk &#124; sign) 19:03, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed; I don't have time to revisit the review myself. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Nice short article. Hook is cited by Source #4 (and it's quite interesting), sources are reliable, prose issues have been fixed, article is new/long enough, and there are no copyright violations. There is no need for a QPQ because this is JeBonSer's first nomination. Image is under public domain since it is over 100 years old. Good to go. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 15:56, 21 May 2019 (UTC)