Template:Did you know nominations/Principality of Erfurt

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 Allen3 ^talk 15:23, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Principality of Erfurt edit

(

)

... that during the Napoleonic occupation of the Principality of Erfurt, the French introduced street lighting and a tax on foreign horses to pay for maintaining the road surface?

ALT1:... that during Napoleon's occupation of the Principality of Erfurt, the French auctioned off the inventory of the Peterskirche—including the organ, bells and even the tower of the Corpus Christi chapel?
ALT2:... that a 70-foot (21-metre) column was built in Napoleon's Principality of Erfurt to commemorate the birth of the Prince Imperial—only to be destroyed within 3 years when the Sixth Coalition recaptured the city?
ALT3:... that rioting after the French decreed 1,000 men from their Principality of Erfurt would be conscripted into the Grande Armée led the French to order the closure of all inns and alehouses?
ALT4:... that during the Napoleonic occupation of the Principality of Erfurt, the French dismantled part of one of the fortresses protected the city, looking for imaginary treasure that couldn't possibly exist?
Reviewed: Exempt (3 credits), but will review one or more shortly

5x expanded by OwenBlacker (talk). Self-nominated at 00:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

Adequate sourcing: - no reference for first paragraph of background and establishment
Neutral:
Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited: - ALT0, ALT1 and ALT3 accepted AGF to non-English sources. ALT2 needs an inline citation at the end of the sentence.
Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: ALT2 may be a good hook for Wikipedia's 15th Birthday (or at least if its destruction is omitted). Jolly Ω Janner 07:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Jolly Janner (also, say hi to Plymouth for me; I grew up in Ivybridge :o) ). I was meaning to fix the {{cn}} I forgot that I'd left about the destruction of the Cyriaksburg Fortress this evening, so I shall find a suitable reference for that first background paragraph as well.

The destruction of the Napoleonsäule is referenced in citation 8 ("Denkmale Erfurts 1806–1814" [Monuments of Erfurt 1806–1814] (in German). Thüringer Naturbrief. Retrieved 3 January 2016., which has an image of Beck's painting of the column all aflame). The relevant passage reads

Endlich am 6. Januar 1814 war der ersehnte Tag gekommen, die leidvolle Belagerung durch die verbündeten Truppen beendet. Die französischen Besatzungstruppen übergaben die Stadt an die Preußen und zogen sich zunächst auf die Citadelle Petersberg und die Cyriaksburg zurück. ... In der Folge zerstörten einige Bürger den Napoleon-Obelisken. Dieses symbolhafte Ereignis wurde in zwei Bildern festgehalten. Der Erfurter Maler H. Beck zeigt in seinem zeitgenössischen Aquarell eine Ansicht des Anger mit Blick nach Osten mit dem bereits brennenden Obelisken im Mittelpunkt, aus dem Flammen am Sockel und an der Spitze steigen. Der Vordergrund ist in ganzer Breite mit jubelnden Bürgern und Soldaten ausgefüllt. Das Ganze wird von der damaligen Bebauung umrahmt mit Kaufmannskirche und ummauerten Kirchhof sowie „Römischen Kaiser“ im Hintergrund. Noch eindringlicher ist die Szene auf dem Schlußbild der 1882 eingeweihten historischen Galerie im Rathausfestsaal „Die Zerstörung des Napoleon-Obelisken auf dem Anger“

, which Google translates to

Finally, on 6 January 1814, the awaited day arrived, stopped the painful siege by the allied troops. The French occupation forces handed over the city to the Prussians and initially withdrew the Petersberg Citadel and the Cyriaksburg. ... As a result, some citizens destroyed the Napoleon Obelisk. This symbolic event was held in two images. The Erfurt painter H. Beck shows rise in its contemporary watercolor shows a view of Anger facing east with the already burning obelisk at the center, from the flames at the base and at the top. The foreground is filled in its entire width with jubilant citizens and soldiers. The whole is framed by the then development with a merchant church and walled cemetery and "Imperial" in the background. Still haunting the scene is displayed on the final scene of the 1882 initiated historical gallery in Rathausfestsaal "The destruction of Napoleon obelisk in Anger".

I've also added an inline citation pointing to reference 5 ("1806–1814: Erfurt unter französischer Besetzung" [1806–1814: Erfurt under French occupation] (in German). Erfurt Stadtverwaltung [Erfurt city administration]. Retrieved 2 January 2016.) where it reads 1811 (20. März) ... Die ca. 20 m hohe Säule wird beim Einmarsch der verbündeten Truppen 1814 durch Bürger der Stadt zerstört., which Google translates to The 20 m high column is destroyed by citizens of the city during the invasion of the allied troops 1814th. Both machine translations are clearly imperfect, but both should give you enough detail not to need to assume my good faith, I would hope? :o) I've also added clearer citations to both of those pages for the detail of the Napoleonshöhe as well, fwiw.

Does that resolve your concerns with ALT2 ? Do you still need me to sort out a reference for the first paragraph of the background section or can that be taken in good faith for the DYKnom? (Like I say, I should be able to look at that this evening, I would hope.) — OwenBlacker (Talk) 07:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the translations, although all that was needed was an inline citation for the sentence. I can now see you have done so for the column's construction (and destruction). Based on the overall exceptionally high quality of referencing, and the fact that the background paragraph isn't very disputable, I will pass the overall referencing quality on the article. I would advise a closing editor to use ALT2 for Wikipedia's 15th Birthday and trim away the second phrase about its destruction. PS I've actually never lived in Plymouth. I spent the first 18 years of my life growing up in Ivybridge, however. I've now moved far away and cannot say hello for you :( Jolly Ω Janner 23:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Jolly Janner: Hah, what a small world :o)

Out of interest, what's your concern about the destruction? I thought the reference for that was ok (and that's what I thought made the hook more interesting). If you don'think it's adequately referenced, I'd like to improve that... — OwenBlacker (Talk) 11:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The referencing on its destruction is/was perfect. It is merely that I was searching for potential hooks to celebrate Wikipedia's 15th Birthday and felt that would be ideal, however mentioning its destruction put a damper on the theme. The Birthday has since passed, so any closing reviewer can select whichever hook they prefer (in full). Just a side-note (and I have fixed this in the aritcle), the 70-foot column was rounded and converted from 20 m, so don't convert backwards and end up with 21 m! Jolly Ω Janner 21:13, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Aaah, I see. I thought that it was destroyed so soon after was an amusing part of the hook, personally, but them humour is subjective, after all, and I can see what you mean if you were looking for a birthday-specific hook. I've reverted your size change, though — while the first source says "ca. 20m", but the second source says Die Säule hatte eine Höhe von 70 Fuß, also etwa 21 m. ("The pillar had a height of 70 foot, thus about 21 m"). I had originally put exactly what you changed it to, but then amended it to be 70-foot once I found the second source. Good spot, though; it's nice to know people actually check the references properly! — OwenBlacker (Talk) 09:39, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

That's quite alright. My final recommendation would therefore be to add a conversion in metres to the hook, as some of our readers will be unfamiliar with feet as a measurement, especially since the article is now in Germany. All the hooks are great, but I have a slight liking to ALT2. I will leave them all unstruck and up to the promoter to chose. Jolly Ω Janner 09:45, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

I've added that conversion, as you recommend, plus I've added an ALT4, now that I've found a reference for it. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

@Jolly Janner: It just occurs to me; could I ask you repeat the {{DYK checklist}} review please, so it's clear that all issues have been resolved (assuming you're happy with everything, of course). Thank you so much for helping me get there! — OwenBlacker (Talk) 19:58, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall:

Non-English sources accepted as good faith. Jolly Ω Janner 22:17, 23 January 2016 (UTC)