- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:43, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Paul Emile Diou
edit- ... that Paul Emile Diou, described as a "shy and timid" subaltern, fell in battle at the head of his troops as a brigade commander in the First World War?
- ALT1:... that General Paul Emile Diou was mortally wounded at the Battle of Lorraine in an action that also caused the deaths of his second in command, a regimental commander and most of the medical staff?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kristian Krefting
- Comment: Note on sources: citation 6 is a publication by the French Defence Historical Service and citation 4 is from the website of a published historian
Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self nominated at 12:49, 24 August 2014 (UTC).
The article looks good. I'm tempted to approve. However, we really shouldn't have this many Red Wlink's. For example, the Wlink for 81st Infantry Regiment is repeated at least twice. Also, the hook needs to be cited. So the sentence that starts with "As a subaltern he was reportedly a "shy and timid character, but an energetic worker"..." needs to have a citation at the end. I'm also questioning the notability of this person. But for now, please have those first issues fixed. Étienne Dolet (talk) 17:34, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the duplicate 81st Regiment link, well spotted! I have left the others as they are all legitimate future articles in my opinion. I have added a ref to the hook sentence (it was covered by the one at the end of the next sentence but I know the DYK rule here). Make what you will of the notability issue, I think any general who commands a brigade, particularly in action, has a good chance of being notable enough - Dumelow (talk) 19:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
There's still duplicated red links. Please have them removed. Judging by the sources, I am not all convinced that this person is notable. The sources are primarily based off service records. I would like a secondary opinion on this before we move forward. I suggest finding more third-party sources on Diou. Cheers, Étienne Dolet (talk) 00:20, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the remaining duplicated link (to the 69th Regiment). If you are worried about notability please feel free to take to AFD if you want - Dumelow (talk) 14:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- @EtienneDolet: Had you thought any more about this nomination. To be honest I had rather forgotten about it myself - Dumelow (talk) 20:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- I'll nominate this for AfD. That'll force more public opinion on its notability. And if the article is kept, I'll finish the review. Regards, Étienne Dolet (talk) 21:03, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- @EtienneDolet: Had you thought any more about this nomination. To be honest I had rather forgotten about it myself - Dumelow (talk) 20:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the remaining duplicated link (to the 69th Regiment). If you are worried about notability please feel free to take to AFD if you want - Dumelow (talk) 14:17, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- I have removed the duplicate 81st Regiment link, well spotted! I have left the others as they are all legitimate future articles in my opinion. I have added a ref to the hook sentence (it was covered by the one at the end of the next sentence but I know the DYK rule here). Make what you will of the notability issue, I think any general who commands a brigade, particularly in action, has a good chance of being notable enough - Dumelow (talk) 19:09, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Article at Articles for deletion; nomination on hold until AfD concludes. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
AfD is now cleared. Notability is ascertained. Long enough. New enough. Hook is cited. Good to go!! Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:28, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
