Talk:Elias Beckingham
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Dyspeptic skeptic in topic Odd wording about "the only honest judge"
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elias Beckingham article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Elias Beckingham has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: April 28, 2017. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
A fact from Elias Beckingham appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 May 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
GA Review edit
GA review/successful, 28 April 2017 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||||
Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 14:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
Done Well spotted, today's trick question ;) bit of a naughty reprint on CUP's part really.
|
Odd wording about "the only honest judge" edit
In the lead paragraph:
...he has been called, with only one other, "the only honest judge" of the time.
As I wrote earlier today on the DYK talk page (a hook for this article is in a prep area whose contents are scheduled to appear on the Main Page tomorrow), this is slightly odd; can more than one judge be called the only honest judge? Perhaps one contemporary or historian pronounced Beckingham the only honest judge and another contemporary or historian described a different judge thusly? What does the cited source actually say? --Dyspeptic skeptic (talk) 14:05, 20 May 2017 (UTC)