Talk:Black Eagle Silver Certificate

Did you know nomination

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 BorgQueen talk 12:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Black Eagle Silver Certificate

• ... that between 1899 and 1923 the United State government issued 3,604,239,600 US$1 Black Eagle Silver Certificates (pictured)?

• Source: Source is offline: Bowers, Q. David; Sundman, David M. (2006). 100 Greatest American Currency Notes: The Stories Behind the Most Fascinating Colonial, Confederate, Federal, Obsolete, and Private American Notes. Chicago Illinois: Whitman Publishing. p. 45. ISBN 978-0-7948-2006-0.

• ALT1: ... that there are 13 varieties of the US$1 Black Eagle Silver Certificate' (pictured)? Source: offline source: Chambliss, Carlson R.; Hessler, Gene (2014). The Comprehensive Catalog of U. S. Federal Large-Size Notes, 1861 – 1929. Speckles Press. pp. 92–93. and offline Cruikshank, Moses (March 1, 1986). The Life I've Been Living. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press. p. 93. ISBN 978-0-912006-23-9.
• ALT2: ... that people called the large-size US$1 Black Eagle Silver Certificates (pictured) "horseblankets"? Source: source
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Kettle
• Comment: I will likely continue to tinker but it is complete

Moved to mainspace by Bruxton (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 155 past nominations.

Bruxton (talk) 00:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC).

• Hi Bruxton, nice article. I'll take a look at this one. Article was created on 11 September and exceeds minimum length. Many sources are offline but I found no issues with overly close paraphrasing from the online ones. I am not familiar with numismatics sources but didn't spot anything obviously unreliable. I had a few comments you may want to look at before I complete the review - Dumelow (talk) 07:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

• Per WP:DYKCITE "The facts of the hook in the article should be cited no later than the end of the sentence in which they appear ... Citations at the end of the paragraph are not sufficient". This would need to be addressed for ALT0 and ALT2 to be considered
• "The 1899 series replaced the 1896 Educational Series notes which featured history instructing." - I didn't understand this, is the latter part of the sentence missing?
• "the value of the notes is dependent on both condition and who signed the note" - maybe should be "value of the note to modern-day collectors" to make it clear they were all worth $1 at the time.

Thank you for the review @Dumelow:. I think I have fixed those areas of the article. Welcome back, I have missed seeing your contributions. Bruxton (talk) 14:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, good to be back! Completing the review, AGF on offline sources used in the article for the hooks; I didn't notice any overly close paraphrasing from the online sources; image is good quality and properly licensed; a QPQ has been carried out. Looks fine to me - Dumelow (talk) 06:47, 13 September 2024 (UTC)