Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Template:Did you know nominations/Czarodziejski okręt

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Kimikel talk 03:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Czarodziejski okręt

Created by Piotrus (talk) and Oliwiasocz (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 521 past nominations.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 15:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC).

Full review needed.--Launchballer 18:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

It surprises me that this nomination has waited this long, Piotrus, because the topic is interesting and the article is very easy to read. It seems, however, that the article fails the first of the DYK criteria: newness. It was created on 15 September and nominated on 24 September. I would be happy to overlook this if it did not mean almost certainly getting dragged at WT:DYK. If it is any consolation, there are small things that would need to be worked on before the article is eligible anyway, so now you are spared extra work. Surtsicna (talk) 17:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:DYKNEW, seven days can be extended for a day or two upon request.--Launchballer 17:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
That is very helpful. I much prefer to be strict with article size and comprehensiveness than with newness, and this article is certainly of a decent size. I think the translation "The Magic Ship" needs to be clearly marked as an unofficial/unpublished literal translation and should probably be avoided in this hook. Quotation marks should be used for quotes instead of italics per MOS:ITALICS. The women mentioned in the Analysis section should probably be described with their profession (e.g. literary critics). Kuliczkowska's comment about a "spoiled millionaire" and the criticism of the portrayal of the husband do not seem to be contradictory, so "though" is probably the wrong word to use in that sentence. Of these, only the translation is a substantial issue. Surtsicna (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
@Surtsicna: Thanks, I fixed all (I hope - please take a look), and we can replace the English unofficial translation in the ALT0 with the Polish title (ALT0a below). Regarding "though", I clarified the passage a bit, the point is Kuliczkowska was praising the criticism of the "filthy rich" character and criticizing the lack of such criticism of another character (she was writing this in the time of communist Poland, adhering to the Marxist views, although I cannot spell that out in the article as this would be ORish, unfortunately). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
All done then! The sourcing appears to be impeccable. Surtsicna (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)