Talk:Un día de vida

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 Vaticidalprophet talk 00:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Promotional pamphlet for the Yugoslav release

• ... that although the 1950 Mexican film Un día de vida bombed with domestic audiences, it became a classic in Yugoslavia? Source: "Mexican Golden Age Cinema in Tito's Yugoslavia" by Robert McKee Irwin, pp. 156, 160
  • ALT1: ... that the 1950 Mexican film Un día de vida "made all of Yugoslavia cry"? Source: "Nostalgia por una patria imaginada: la música del mariachi en la antigua Yugoslavia" (in Spanish) by Brana Mijatović, p. 118
  • ALT2: ... that the 1950 Mexican film Un día de vida is regarded by older people in the former Yugoslavia as one of the best-known films, even though "it is probably unknown in every other country"? Source: McKee Irwin, p. 160
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Jeʹvida
  • Comment: QPQ coming later. If needed, I think I can devise another two or three ALTs.

Created by CurryTime7-24 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:59, 16 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Un día de vida; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Article meets DYK requirements and is free from close paraphrasing. Assuming good faith for the offline sources. I prefer ALT0 since it gets the main point across the best compared to the other hooks. The only issue is that the sentence that supports it, "Eventually Un día de vida became considered a classic of Yugoslav cinema", lacks a footnote. Once this is resolved and the QPQ is provided I will approve this. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:47, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

• @CurryTime7-24: Please respond to the above. Z1720 (talk) 00:43, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

• I thought I did. But just in case, QPQ and added cite per review were done a few days ago. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, that should do it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:56, 26 October 2023 (UTC)