Talk:Royal Expedition
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Extraordinary Writ in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Royal Expedition appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 March 2022 (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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination edit
- 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) 04:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that supplies were so poor during the Royal Expedition of the First Carlist War that some soldiers wore cardboard-heeled shoes? Source: "His campaign was slowed down by the desperate hunger and neglect faced by his own men, as even the shoes which the hated asentistas (private contractors) supplied often had wooden or even cardboard heels which fell apart soon into campaigning." page 810
- ALT1: ... that Carlist troops retreating in the late stages of the First Carlist War's Royal Expedition would be shot if they fell out from fatigue to discourage desertions? Source: "Routed Carlists stumbled aimlessly into villages, and those who fell out from fatigue were shot by their own side in order to discourage desertion. " page 810
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Jack Sweeney
Created by A. C. Santacruz (talk). Self-nominated at 21:14, 8 March 2022 (UTC).
– A. C. Santacruz, everything here looks good. The article was recently created and is long enough; Earwig's tool identifies no copyright concerns; the article is neutral and duly cited to reliable sources. I've verified both hooks, and they both comply with the guidelines and are interesting: I think I slightly prefer ALT0, but I'll let the promoter choose. One thought (not a DYK requirement, just a suggestion): perhaps you could provide a bit more background (maybe just a few sentences) about who the Carlists were, whom they were fighting, and what disagreements caused the war? A little bit of context would probably be helpful for readers (like me!) who weren't previously familiar with this part of history. Anyways, thanks for writing this interesting and important article! Best regards, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:47, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Extraordinary Writ, do you mean in the article? I'm planning on doing that :) I'm hoping to nom to GA by the end of this month, so by the time the hooks gets to main page the article should be in much better state.A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 08:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what I meant; apologies if I was unclear. I'm glad that you're planning on nominating the article for GA: I can tell plenty of work went into it! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:53, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Extraordinary Writ, do you mean in the article? I'm planning on doing that :) I'm hoping to nom to GA by the end of this month, so by the time the hooks gets to main page the article should be in much better state.A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 08:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Extraordinary Writ: Mind leaving a reminder about the obvious example of cite-overkill next time you find something like this? Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- Noted; thanks for taking care of it. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:26, 26 March 2022 (UTC)