- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Orlady (talk) 14:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Nicolae Fleva edit
- ... that Nicolae Fleva, who was once shot at by a Romanian Prime Minister in office, allegedly sold his loyalty to the Central Powers at age 75?
- Reviewed: Manasse ǃNoreseb
- ALT 1: "... that Nicolae Fleva, who helped prepare Romania's independence in 1877, allegedly sold his loyalty to the Central Powers in 1915?"
Created/expanded by Dahn (talk). Self nom at 08:26, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
- Please hold this for December 1, Romania's national holiday. Thanks. Dahn (talk) 08:28, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
Excellent, detailed, many sources. But I am not so happy with the hook part (in both) which deals with with something alleged. I am sure you can find something factual, to continue the shooting start, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- This is because, again, I wanted to add something that relates to his WWI activity. The "alleged" is an extra precaution on my part: the sources are quite adamant that he at the very least did something fishy at the time. But okay, how about:
- ALT 2: ... that Nicolae Fleva, who was once shot at by a Romanian Prime Minister in office, became a prominent supporter of the Central Powers at age 75? Dahn (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- I can see "supporter", but not "prominent", perhaps a language problem? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not (supposed to be) parroting the sources. The man was a prominent politician, was invited to lead a Germanophile daily, ended up editing another, plus sources indicate that there was enough public scrutiny of his activities for the controversy to continue after the war. Also note that even fellow Germanophiles argue that he was being paid quite a lot for his purported services. To just say that he was a supporter, IMHO, is a bland hook, and to say that he was prominent does in fact reflect the sources. Meaning that he was better known to the public than some of the other Germanophiles. Dahn (talk) 23:42, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- You made me understand better, thank you.
(for Romanian sources) All three hooks possible and good to go, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- This is because, again, I wanted to add something that relates to his WWI activity. The "alleged" is an extra precaution on my part: the sources are quite adamant that he at the very least did something fishy at the time. But okay, how about:
