This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
A fact from Edmonds Band Rotunda appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 November 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the basement of the Edmonds Band Rotunda(pictured) was once used as a kitchen?
Latest comment: 11 days ago11 comments7 people in discussion
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.
Nice article, I found the fact it was a restaurant to be quite interesting/unique, heritage buildings often get rebuilt but a rotunda serving as a restaurant paints quite an interesting thought in my mind. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
Seconding Traumnovelle, my only comment is that the hook is a bit boring. I think a more interesting one might be something like ...that the small basement of the Edmonds Band Rotunda was once used as a kitchen?. And thank you for including my photo! David Palmer//cloventt(talk)20:35, 22 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
I was going to approve the new hook, but there are some issues: 1. the sentence supporting the fact lacks a footnote, 2. the source does not refer to the basement as "small", and 3. the article is in need of a copyedit for some minor grammatical errors. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the review, Narutolovehinata5. I've added a citation to the end of the sentence supporting the hook, and have done some copyedits on the article. Here is ALT2, without the "small":
"... that the basement of the Edmonds Band Rotunda(pictured) was once used as a kitchen?"
Thank you, this should be good to go. Given the original reviewer's topic ban I did a second check of the article, as well as a check of the QPQ. @Panamitsu: I have to note that with your provided QPQ, you neglected to mention that nomination's QPQ in the review, but given that was the only thing missing and the article was still checked otherwise, I'll let it slide, with a reminder to mention a QPQ's need or if it was done in future reviewers. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
.jpg)
A bit uninteresting, but looks good. 
Tagging for a second review, given Nuggeteer's topic ban. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
I was going to approve the new hook, but there are some issues: 1. the sentence supporting the fact lacks a footnote, 2. the source does not refer to the basement as "small", and 3. the article is in need of a copyedit for some minor grammatical errors. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, this should be good to go. Given the original reviewer's topic ban I did a second check of the article, as well as a check of the QPQ. @Panamitsu: I have to note that with your provided QPQ, you neglected to mention that nomination's QPQ in the review, but given that was the only thing missing and the article was still checked otherwise, I'll let it slide, with a reminder to mention a QPQ's need or if it was done in future reviewers. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)