Template:Did you know nominations/History of chocolate
- 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 TheNuggeteer talk 23:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
History of chocolate
- ... that a woman was considered a witch because her husband prepared chocolate instead of her?
- Source: "Juan, a thirty-three-year-old mulato con-struction worker in Santiago, denounced his mulata wife Cecilia to the Inquisition, accusing her of acting as a sorcerer-witch (hechizera-bruja). He charged that Cecilia used spells and curses ‘‘so that he could not be a man on all the occasions that he desired to have intercourse with his wife.’’ Ultimately, Juan’s evidence that Cecilia had used sorcery to bewitch him centered on what he perceived to be their inverted household gender roles, shown by his inability to control his ‘‘unnatural’’ behavior of preparing the morning chocolate while his wife slept in... Cecilia was eventually convicted by the Inquisition in Santiago for sorcery, and officials sent her overland under guard to the central Inquisition jail in Mexico City." - "Chocolate, Sex, and Disorderly Women in Late-Seventeenth- and Early-Eighteenth-Century Guatemala." (Few, 2005)
- Reviewed:
- Comment: I found this very intriguing while reviewing "history of chocolate" for GA.
Improved to Good Article status by Rollinginhisgrave (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.
It is a wonderful world (talk) 19:48, 23 September 2024 (UTC).
Article was passed for GA yesterday, so is new enough. It is more than long enough, reads neutrally, and properly uses in-line citations throughout. The hook is certainly interesting, short enough, and is cited in-line. I also double-checked the reference for the quoted information. The copyvio detector found no issues and no QPQ is required. One minor thing: Regarding the hook, is the comma necessary? I'm not sure what it adds grammatically. SilverserenC 23:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your review, I don't think the comma is necessary. Is there anything I need to do to get rid of it? It is a wonderful world (talk) 08:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nope, you're allowed to change hooks before they're promoted (and admins can change them in the queue afterwards). Though if the change is significant, it's usually better to make the different version an Alt hook instead. Anyways, I've gone ahead and removed the comma just now. SilverserenC 01:42, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your review, I don't think the comma is necessary. Is there anything I need to do to get rid of it? It is a wonderful world (talk) 08:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)