- 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Iowa Authors and Their Works
Created by SL93 (talk). Self-nominated at 04:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC).
- The alt was added by Victuallers, but I'm not entirely sure that works because that comment was made in 1923. Maybe something could be added to it and the article about the 1939 Pulitzer Prize for History winner Frank Luther Mott saying it? SL93 (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
I think you're wrong. You are confusing the later quote with the idea that it was first published in parts years before. You can quote what was said about it in 1923, in 1939, or in 2021, but it doesn't change that it was first published in parts. However this was only a suggestion so I'm OK for you to strike it out but I would like it to be for a valid reason. You may decide to strike out my hook suggestion ,but it was still "first published in parts". Victuallers (talk) 18:28, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Victuallers You completely misunderstood me. I'm not confusing anything. I'm only referring to the quote "most comprehensive and useful work of Iowa bibliography" due to the fact that the quote is from 1923. That means I don't think we should be quoting it when the 1923 quote is old and may not be true today. SL93 (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- You are right, sorry, I did misunderstand you. Although I see the quote marks saying "it was said that". But I can see that you might want to add more caveats than just the quotes and I have made one change Victuallers (talk) 22:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- It's fine. ALT1 is acceptable to me now. SL93 (talk) 22:31, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough
|
|
|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
|
|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
|
|
|
Overall: 
Concise and valuable article, initial hook is intriguing. No Swan So Fine (talk) 08:33, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
To
T:DYK/P1
Concise and valuable article, initial hook is intriguing. No Swan So Fine (talk) 08:33, 17 September 2021 (UTC)