- 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 97198 (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lawrence Burd edit
- ... that Machiavelli expert Lawrence Burd owned 8000 Penny Blacks (pictured)?
- Reviewed: My second nomination
Created by Philafrenzy (talk), Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 23:52, 12 May 2014 (UTC).
- New enough, long enough, and quality is fine. AGF as source for the 8000 is offline (though another online source also confirms). Image is on Commons, so good on that end too. Aboutmovies (talk) 05:57, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
- That is a fantastic hook: wouldn't dare to suggest an improvement. And at least one editor has learned something – which is what it is about. I bow to you, sincerely. Si Trew (talk) 21:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:38, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's superbly written as well. I am no expert in philately – my name is not dropped in stamp-collecting circles, and I am hardly a household word at Stanley Gibbons – but to bring your competence to a general audience, well Sir I take my hat off to you. Si Trew (talk) 21:43, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you again, still trying to get the middle bit right. I see only what is wrong with my words but it's nice to know that that is not the general feeling! Philafrenzy (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
No, I thank you. We could have:... Laurence Burd's Machiavellian habits enabled him to buy 8,000 Penny-blacks
...or something like that – drag the audience in. Superbly written I learned a lot. Yours is straight while mine is twisty, what do you think? Si Trew (talk) 22:01, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you again, still trying to get the middle bit right. I see only what is wrong with my words but it's nice to know that that is not the general feeling! Philafrenzy (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- It's superbly written as well. I am no expert in philately – my name is not dropped in stamp-collecting circles, and I am hardly a household word at Stanley Gibbons – but to bring your competence to a general audience, well Sir I take my hat off to you. Si Trew (talk) 21:43, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:38, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- That is a fantastic hook: wouldn't dare to suggest an improvement. And at least one editor has learned something – which is what it is about. I bow to you, sincerely. Si Trew (talk) 21:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- Well I doubt his book on Machiavelli bought him very many Penny Blacks, even at the prices then, so I am included to keep it straight rather than twisty! Philafrenzy (talk) 22:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- I created the redirect at Laurence Burd as
{{R from alternate name}}, hope that is OK with you. Si Trew (talk) 22:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)- Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- I added two more redirects at Laurence Bird and Lawrence Bird with
{{R from incorrect title}}. I have to go to bed now. No need to thank me; thank you: you have made the encyclopaedia better and I take my hat off to you. If I can help in any way with a bit of gnoming, which is what I usually do, then just{{ping}}me. Goodnight, my sincere regards. Si Trew (talk) 22:25, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
- I added two more redirects at Laurence Bird and Lawrence Bird with
- Thanks. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)