Template:Did you know nominations/Port of Póvoa de Varzim
- The following discussion 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 06:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Port of Póvoa de Varzim edit
- ... that the Port of Póvoa de Varzim in Portugal has 1000 years of recorded history and continuous use?
- Comment: May need linguistic cleanup. Other hooks can be used.
Created/expanded by PedroPVZ (talk). Self nom at 22:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
This is an impressive expansion but nowhere near the required fivefold. this version has 3297 characters while the one for submission here has 10395. I'm sorry but this cannot go for DYK. --Pgallert (talk) 07:42, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- oh... it lacks 6K... I'll try to add the 6K needed. --Pedro (talk) 08:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- 6K is a lot, but do post here if you achieve that. Please also remember that every paragraph needs a reference, there are a few missing right now. --Pgallert (talk) 08:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- Arent you confusing this with feature articles candidates? the actual source is there, so not that hard to get, just needs to be checked which. added 3380 right now. It now lacks 2710 characters. I'll add it later today with new pics. Useful pics is what is really lacking in the article. I plan to take some today. ---Pedro (talk) 09:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, it is a DYK rule (of thumb, exceptions possible), see Wikipedia:DYKAR#D2. The main sources, unless I have misunderstood what you want to say, are offline and in Portuguese. That's indeed what I would call hard to get. That makes it particularly important to tag which source supports which statement. Cheers, --Pgallert (talk) 11:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- The size of the article is no longer an issue. Added some more sources and several pics I took in the morning. Some didn't turned out well, but others look great. --Pedro (talk) 21:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- Article has not been expanded 5x (only around 4.5x). - Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 12:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- Arent you confusing this with feature articles candidates? the actual source is there, so not that hard to get, just needs to be checked which. added 3380 right now. It now lacks 2710 characters. I'll add it later today with new pics. Useful pics is what is really lacking in the article. I plan to take some today. ---Pedro (talk) 09:39, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- 6K is a lot, but do post here if you achieve that. Please also remember that every paragraph needs a reference, there are a few missing right now. --Pgallert (talk) 08:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
- oh... it lacks 6K... I'll try to add the 6K needed. --Pedro (talk) 08:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
DYKcheck confirms that this article has now achieved 5x expansion. Time for someone to undertake a comprehensive review. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
This article is now a 5x expansion and is long enough to qualify for DYK. The expansion started on May 10th and the hook is established from multiple sources. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:26, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
