Template:Did you know nominations/Sami Droubi

The following discussion 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 Miyagawa (talk) 08:34, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Sami Droubi edit

(

)

... that between 1963 and 1975, Sami Droubi (pictured) served as Syria's ambassador to Morocco, Yugoslavia, Egypt, the Arab League, Spain and the Holy See?

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Yamamoto Yaeko

Created by Al Ameer son (talk). Self nominated at 23:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC).

The article is new and long enough (5,669 characters). It is within the policy. I am afraid that hook is not accurate. He was not ambassador of Syria in Brazil, but of United Arab Republic. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 08:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Clarified, sorry for the delay. --Al Ameer (talk) 04:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I am concerned about the copyright of the picture. It is taken in 1960 and the license provided refers to media created before 1954.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 06:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

The photograph falls under Type A i.e. "Photographs or works of fine arts or works of plastic arts" and thus is in the public domain because it was taken before 1994. Either way, the image is not that great (I had to do some work on it to remove the "Syrian History" watermarks and it's quality has unfortunately been lowered.) It doesn't need to be included in the hook. --Al Ameer (talk) 07:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I am uncertain if the sentence in question applies to all photographs to or "photographs or works of fine arts" of fine arts.

Good to go without image. AGF on offline sources. If you insist to keep the image in the hook I would appreciate if you can provide a second opinion about it (during next 7 days I will rarely be online). --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:17, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure the image falls under type A, but I'm fine with dropping it from the nom anyway (very unlikely it would have been used by the DYK admins in any case). --Al Ameer (talk) 17:41, 14 September 2013 (UTC)