Talk:The Oxford Illustrated History of Medieval Europe
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Theleekycauldron
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
 | A fact from The Oxford Illustrated History of Medieval Europe appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 30 November 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
- 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) 06:52, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that The Oxford Illustrated History of Medieval Europe is the antidote to the belief that the Middle Ages were a period of ignorance and barbarism?
- ALT1: ... that The Oxford Illustrated History of Medieval Europe isn't a book that perhaps cannot be written?
- Reviewed: Friedrich Hefty
Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 10:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC).
- One regular hook and one "quirky" hook. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Started review. Alex2006 (talk) 16:06, 10 November 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 |
|---|
|
QPQ: 
- Not done
Overall: 
Nice Article about an Encyclopedia. The article is new enough and long enough. Earwig gives no obvious plagiarism (the high value depends on the table of contents and the name of the encyclopedia). It is well referenced, AGF on the not accessible sources. There is no picture. The two hooks are interesting and cited in the article (I prefer the quirky one :-)). Waiting for the QPQ... Alex2006 (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Alessandro57: added qpq. Whispyhistory (talk) 20:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Sorry for the giant delay, @Whispyhistory:, but the ping didn't work this time, and I am busy in real world...QPQ done, good to go! Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 19:20, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
