Template:Did you know nominations/Leslie Peter Wenham
- 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: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 22:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Should the article ever become a Good Article, it can be renominated at that time. (Note: nomination closed by Hawkeye7, who wrote the preceding message, but not completely; substituting the DYKsubpage template so it fully closes, which will use my name and the current time.)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Leslie Peter Wenham
edit- ... that the Roman fortress of Eboracum (modern day York) was extensively excavated by Leslie Peter Wenham in the 1950s, 60s and 70s?
Created by Zakhx150 (talk). Self nominated at 12:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC).
New enough. NOT long enough. DYK Check shows: 1321 characters (211 words) "readable prose size". Another 179 characters needed. Bulleted lists don't count twoards the total. None of the sources are avaiable online - would it be possible to links to free online versions of any of them? If he is generally known as Peter Wenham, then you should move the article there, and that will leave Leslie Peter Wenham as a redirect. Will finish review when expanded to 1500 chars. Edwardx (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Edwardx: I have added a few characters to the article so that it meets the length criteria. Thanks.--Skr15081997 (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
New reviewer needed, since Edwardx has not returned. A full review should be done, since everything checked before will need to be rechecked after the expansion. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:49, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Article is now new enough and long enough. I found a URL for the obituary, even though it is offline. However, this seems to be the only secondary source and verification for the notability of the subject; the other footnotes are simply the scientist's own papers. I've been looking for secondary sources on the subject but cannot come up with any, so I tagged the article. Yoninah (talk) 00:22, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
- Skr15081997, are you willing to pursue this article further? If not, we may have to close the nomination; Zakhx150 has not edited in four weeks, and never did respond to the original talk-page ping on August 2. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:14, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I won't be able to help. It's hard to find independent third party sources for the subject.--Skr15081997 (talk) 11:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the original editor has not responded and also has not edited for a month, and the article has a notability template on it for very good reasons. Under the circumstances, I'm closing this as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
