Template:Did you know nominations/Boiled leather

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 Yoninah (talk) 15:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Boiled leather edit

Boiled leather pickelhaube
Boiled leather pickelhaube

5x expanded by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 19:02, 17 October 2017 (UTC).

Review

General eligibility:

  • New enough: No - The assessment of the DYKcheck took is that it's gone from 810 to 3771 which isn't quite 5x
Ok, will add. Johnbod (talk) 02:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
It should be over 5,000 now, and I have some more to add. Johnbod (talk) 03:29, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Now something over 6,800. Johnbod (talk) 19:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: No - The picture captions could use some citations. For example, there's an unsourced quotation in one case.
Most of them are Metropolitan Museum of Art releases with museum metadata on the picture file, including that quotation (which is also in the pic file name in fact). I think that's enough, no? Johnbod (talk) 02:03, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - The timing seems debatable as the pickelhaube article says that steel started to be used in 1915 and that leather wasn't fully phased out until 1918.
"Beginning in 1916, the Pickelhaube was slowly replaced by a new German steel helmet (the Stahlhelm) intended to offer greater head protection from shell fragments." is what it says. I've read more on this, & will dig it out. 1916 still seems to be the right date for the general introduction. Johnbod (talk) 01:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Added: Stone, David, The Kaiser's Army: The German Army in World War One, pp. 220-221, 2015, Bloomsbury Publishing, ISBN 1844862917, 9781844862917, google books gives a pretty full account. There were small field trials in 1915, but the general introduction was in 1916. There are an alarming number of other good sources confirming this - there's a whole book on the Stahlhelm! Johnbod (talk) 18:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Interesting: No - I reckon there are better possibilities such as the bit about eating your armour or the even later use by firemen.
The article wording tiptoes around the fact that the historic sources don't actually specify that the leather eaten was cuir bouilli, though they probably were - a general issue in writing about the stuff. It would be difficult to word a hook though. Johnbod (talk) 02:06, 20 October 2017
A problem with a fireman hook is that though Commons has hundreds of pics of leather fire helmets, I can't find any that specify it is boiled leather - none are images with museum metadata that I can see. Johnbod (talk) 03:32, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
I would add the fancy French term to the hook to make it more interesting. Volunteer Marek `

(UTC)

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: It's a good topic but some issues, as noted above. Andrew D. (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

@Andrew Davidson: I think these points are all now dealt with, but let me know if there are further queries. Johnbod (talk) 18:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I think that the pronunciation is more like "queer boo-yi" or "queer boo-yee" (Chaucer spells it " quyrboilly", and assorted other pre-standardized-spelling English authors write it in assorted ways none of which seem to involve a "w" sound mentioned in the lede). A sound file would be nice.
How about either the excellent image of the book carrying case which is the lead article image or the following image of a small boiled-leather chest? The Metropolitan Museum of Art says that both are cuir-bouilli, which seems fairly reliable to me. You can see the leather, too, unlike the helmet.
Content suggestions: some more non-military material would be nice. A section on what happens to the leather physically and chemically when it hardens, and the debate about manufacturing methods, would be really interesting. How about a section on cuir bouilli's use in drinking vessels[1], and all the English pubs named "The Leather Bottle" or some such? Or a section on bookbinding uses, protecting or even substituting for boards?[2] Reliquaries, portable altars, pyxes (pyxides, says Wikipedia...), the replica Carolingian cross and so on might make a section of religious uses.
I've handled cuir-bouilli which the maker said was stuffed with sand and baked, and it was stiff and solid. The shape was characteristic of a tightly-stuffed shaped roundish beanbag with a neck, like some images I've seen of historic cuir boulli (realize that this is OR, but it might be sourcable). HLHJ (talk) 04:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Chest made from cuir bouilli
Chest made from cuir bouilli
I based the pronunciation (someone will be along with an IPA version that few can understand soon, no doubt) on the modern French rather than Middle English, which seems appropriate. I will copy this to the article talk, as most of it is not DYK-related. If the hook is on the pickelhaube, then the pic should be, and it is far more striking at the tiny DYK size. You can in fact see the leather grain fine on expansion. The article's main pic would not work at this size at all. More at article talk .... Johnbod (talk) 18:50, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • @Andrew Davidson: Please change the formatting of your review in future so that it doesn't look like it's a separate section on the same level as the article nomination! The sections in bold look identical to the name of the article when scanning through the page! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:41, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
You're right, I should have put a lot of that in the article talk. Thank you for moving it. I've added some comments there, too. I think the article is unbalanced in the direction of military uses. The picture is striking, but not as an illustration of boiled leather.
Obviously a hook about a helmet with a picture of a small chest or a book satchel would be silly, it would need a new hook. A hook about the miner's hat might also be interesting. Presumably the miners chose non-metal protective gear for reasons similar to the firefighters, avoiding sparks that might trigger explosions; do you know? HLHJ (talk) 00:57, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
I found you a source for a firemen's helmet made of cuir bouilli:[3] HLHJ (talk) 01:28, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, added that to the article. I don't propose to change the hook, which struck me as the most remarkable fact I found out while expanding the article, & works well with the pic. I havn't found much at all about miner's hats; just the pic in the arrticle really. Johnbod (talk) 01:48, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Are there any DYK-relevant points outstanding here? Various things have been altered at the article, but the hook is the same. Thanks for the interest everybody. Johnbod (talk) 18:03, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

References

  • I take it that the previous discussion has not raised any issues that would prevent this nomination proceeding at DYK. The article is a fivefold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The image is appropriately licensed, the hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:07, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came by to promote this, and found it to be a very interesting and thorough article. Please note one "citation needed" tag in the third paragraph under "Examples of other uses". When I came across the hook, I thought the article was about the history of the German army. I'm wondering if you would consider writing the hook this way to highlight the boiled leather subject:
  • ALT1: ... that the German Army used pickelhaube helmets made of boiled leather (example pictured) until halfway through World War I? Yoninah (talk) 12:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Sigh! Ok, whatever, but the crucial term is of course bolded. Someone had added the cn tag in the several weeks this has been here. I've hidden the sentence now. Johnbod (talk) 02:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Restoring tick per Cwmhiraeth's review. Yoninah (talk) 15:25, 9 November 2017 (UTC)