Template:Did you know nominations/Zarh Pritchard


 * 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) 08:39, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Zarh Pritchard

 * ... that artist Zarh Pritchard (pictured) wore diving gear to paint underwater scenes while underwater?
 * Reviewed: Elaine Allard

Created by Penny Richards (talk). Self nominated at 13:51, 26 June 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg New (23rd), long enough, neutral, no copyvio found via spotcheck, QPQ done. Is there a reason why you didn't link to the actual sources? It would help, for verifiability. Also, WP uses the British quotation (WP:COMMA), if you could change the relevant punctuation. Please ping me if I don't respond. czar ♔   03:04, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll see what punctuation change needs to be made and do that right now, thanks. I linked to as many actual sources as possible (and the hook can be verified at nearly all of those--painting while underwater was Pritchard's claim to fame as an artist). I was using the Proquest Historical Newspapers database for all those Los Angeles Times references (and a few others), and that's behind a firewall so there was no way to link. If the 1920s Los Angeles Times items are indeed linkable, I'd certainly prefer to link those articles.Penny Richards (talk) 03:15, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards
 * Suggested punctuation changes have been made throughout (I think).Penny Richards (talk) 03:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards
 * I did a spotcheck of some of the sources since I have database access, and I added one such ProQuest link to the article. They are behind a paywall, yes, but it's worth linking to them so people like me or those who potentially go to find it can do so. If you're going to add them anyway, it makes it easier to do that now before I continue to verify the links. czar ♔   04:00, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Will do that right now.Penny Richards (talk) 04:06, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards
 * Done, checked them, and I think they work.Penny Richards (talk) 04:31, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards
 * Will you be doing the other ones (Scientific American, Popular Electricity)? And were there any you accessed solely by print? Otherwise it would help to have links to all of them. If at all possible, we should be able to trace your steps for verifiability czar ♔   13:04, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No solely-by-print sources accessed; will fix links to Scientific American and Popular Electricity right now (thought they were already fine, now I see they're not).Penny Richards (talk) 13:33, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards
 * Done. Apparently I overtrimmed the links from Google Books (someone once scolded me for leaving them untrimmed). Now they're probably undertrimmed, but they'll be more helpful for tracing steps.Penny Richards (talk) 13:43, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks for doing all that—looks much better. The way I remember the Google Books trimming is to just leave the "id" and the "pg" (the book's ID and the page of the citation)—everything else can go. All right—I did a spotcheck and don't see any close paraphrasing. Image checks out. Good to go! Nice work czar ♔   14:33, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That's why I do DYKs (well, one reason)--it always improves the entries so much. Thanks for your patience.  Penny Richards (talk) 15:05, 28 June 2014 (UTC)Penny Richards