Template:Did you know nominations/Ian Eaves

522:

steal only once. They may have their method down pat, having long been in the business of living off of stolen goods. They do not have any specific 'look' but are often charming, knowledgeable, and friendly. Ian D. D. Eaves, Curator of the Armory at Her Majesty’s Tower in London and a gentleman, said with a pleasant smile while viewing the armor collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 'There’s a number of things I’d like to make off with if I could be sure I would be undetected.'" This pretty clearly uses Eaves as an example of a (prospective) thief who comes across as a charming gentleman; in doing so, it replaces the NYT reference to Eaves "smiling" (i.e., joking) with a description of Eaves having "a pleasant smile," which carries with it a connotation of duplicity. Similarly, Gandert stated that "The idea that just about anybody is capable of theft is not farfetched. Take, for example, the statement of Ian D.D. Eaves, Curator of the Armory at Her Majesty's Tower, London, when he viewed the armor collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 'There's a number of things I'd like to make off with if I could be sure I would be undetected,' the gentleman said with a smile." This is a pretty clear indication that Gandert considered it "not farfetched" that Eaves would steal if given the chance. --

1439:

the empty notes section. If it should have content, please adjust accordingly. Article appears neutral in tone. I agree with Nikkimaria, that no close paraphrasing issues are detected. Areas highlighted by Earwig are either directed attributed quotes, or proper nouns. No concerns with photos. QPQ has been completed. In the introduction and "Career" section it says "Eaves currently works". It is preferable to reword to say "as of" or "since" to avoid a dated statement. As for the hooks, I agree with the above comments that ALT0 could be misinterpreted and is not an option. ALT1 says "studied" those of Henry VIII, whereas in the article it says "lectured". Please adjust accordingly. ALT2 seems fine, but I do request to post the citation source on this template for transparency and to assist in reviewing and promoting. I also recommended to suggest other hooks. I note there are some clever word play opportunites for Eaves being the "Keeper of the Armour", in relation to other things he did or didn't keep, such as his armor collection, or the log on Royal Armour et cetera.

933:, you're right about the DYKcheck issues; thanks for pointing that out. I've notified the creator of the problem, though I don't know when they'll next be on Knowledge (XXG) or how soon they might fix the bug. A smaller number should be used as the pre-expansion count. I see that you've incorporated the footnote text into the body of the article. For count purposes, this makes sense; I doubt that footnotes would have been allowed in the general count. However, the reason blockquotes aren't counted is because DYK gives credit for original material but not copied material: both public domain material and long quotes are not counted toward the total because the material was written by someone else. We go by 1532:, I take it you mean anywhere in the article? Gandert uses Eave's comment to say that anyone "is capable of theft"; I think we can equate "is capable of" with "prospective." But we could also drop the "prospective" and just say "mislabelled a thief" (or "mislabelled a book thief"), since Nathe is even more blunt: "Book thieves ... do not have any specific 'look' but are often charming, knowledgeable, and friendly. Ian D. D. Eaves, Curator of the Armory at Her Majesty’s Tower in London and a gentleman, said with a pleasant smile while viewing the armor collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 'There’s a number of things I’d like to make off with if I could be sure I would be undetected.'" -- 915:, thanks for the count. I just ran it and got the same number, but I don't think it's accurate. A manual count—lumping together the lead with the two non-blockquote paragraphs in "Publications," and removing the footnotes (e.g., "")—still turns up 1,874 (315 words, 1,560 characters without spaces, 1,874 characters with spaces: that's per MS Word, but www.lettercount.com verifies the 1,874 number). I can't figure out what accounts for the 303-character discrepancy, but I believe 1,874 to be the correct number. Meanwhile, the same method totals 9,406 characters currently (with Word; 9,408 with lettercount). Part of this discrepancy, at least, is clear, as the tool is omitting the footnote. -- 897:, I just checked the May 5, 2018 count (the last edit prior to the January 3, 2019 expansion) using DYKcheck, which is designed to check prose and ignore things like bulleted lists or blockquotes. It gives a prose character count of 2144, but it's including 67 characters that it shouldn't, so 2077 is the key number. A 5x expansion would take 2077 to 10,385 prose characters, but according to DYKcheck, the article is currently at 8163 prose characters, or a hair under 4x. Another 2222 prose characters (that's the actual number; today's fun coincidence) is what's needed for this to be a 5x expansion. Sorry for the bad news. 1608:, it is not an issue of whether he may do something in the future, it is an issue of whether he is currently doing something. Eaves may currently have (I would guess he probably does have) a collection of armor, we simply don't have a current source about his collection; the only source we have states that in 2000, he sold a piece of armour from his collection; there is nothing to suggest that he stopped collecting. At any rate, I'm not sure I see much humor in "the keeper didn't keep" hook, since "Keeper of the Armour" as simply a job title is quite clear. -- 1076:, that you would think that interpolating a few words here and there would make the long quotes, which are not original material, any more original, even if they aren't technically blockquotes. You have still used over forty, or sixty, or one hundred word stretches of the original sources, and dropping a few words from those won't obscure this fact either. So the revision and expansion will have to be significant—it's why I was sorry for the bad news. 938:

has no fewer than three blockquote-size quotes (one over 100 words), none of which can count toward the overall total. There needs to be more paraphrasing in general, and in no event should the Eaves quote be used twice in the same paragraph. I'm really sorry for the bad news—it's an interesting article—but there will need to be more work done on the article, and almost certainly more expansion once those quotes are excluded from the count.

659:

used, but I'd like to reiterate my suggestion of proposing alternatives; who knows, there might be something about him that's even more interesting than that particular fact. And to be frank, even if the hook might not necessarily be a BLP violation, some readers might interpret it as such (having living people labeled as "thieves" on the Main Page, even if as a joke or a misunderstanding, is probably not a good idea in the first place).

1279: 1262: 716: 621: 1162: 1149:(Perhaps I should also note that my reluctance to further expand the article is because it feels as if at this point, additions to the article are mostly additions for the sake of additions. If we're going to replace the quantitative DYK length rules with a qualitative "originality" metric—which I don't recommend—we may as well balance it out with a qualitative "are the further additions worth it" analysis. -- 823: 1473:

put the cited source next to the proposed hook. For ALT2, I see in the citation where he started in 2000, but nothing about when he finished or still being there? Did I miss something? Also, please put the cited source next to the proposed hook. ALT3 I don't see anything in the article resembling "mislabelled a prospective thief". There needs to be similar wording in the article as the hook. Thanks.

1709: 669:, seems like we have three different people in this discussion and about five different opinions. Regardless, a statement that "I had read your response and it did not incline me to change my position," without any reasoning as to why, is hardly a comment worth getting hung up on. Without more, there is certainly no reason for us to wait for it to be withdrawn in order to proceed. -- 405:, I had previously thought that your BLP concern was that the hook might treat Eaves unfairly. Your most recent comment, however, makes me think instead that you are concerned the hook may treat Gandert (the labeller/mislabeller) unfairly. Which is it? In either event, I'm happy to send you the sources if that would help—it's pretty clear that Eaves was joking, but Gandert wasn't. -- 1383: 1363: 1329: 1318: 1435: 975: 844: 318: 1126:, since your latest comment I've added some 900 additional characters, and reworded some of the offending quotations. Perhaps, however, I should have been more clear with my reply. I made no claim that those changes to the quotations made the material more "original"; rather, there is simply no restriction on the use of non-block quotations in the DYK rules. 552:, if after a review it turns out that the hook will not work. As it stands, however, after a month of intermittent comments on this page, all that has been expressed is vague uneasiness with the hook. Moreover, your two reasons for uneasiness—BLP violation, and substantiated by information in a footnote—have been disagreed with by others. Thanks, -- 647:, I think I've adequately responded to Spinningspark's point, which, it seems, is a comment about only one of the sources used to support the hook (Gandert 1982), not the other (Nathe 2005). I'm not sure what your remaining concern is, if any; your last comment wasn't about the hook, it was about the hook fact being supported by footnote. -- 854:), so by my count that brings the initial number down to 1,874 (*5 = 9,370). And then the footnote needs to be counted as to the current number. My count is 8,440—still a hair short (I'll add the required amount tonight), but very doable. By the way, I've changed the tick, as I believe the "no" tick automatically archives at some point. -- 1410: 1401: 1351: 1691:

weight in the section about his career, but not enough that I want to decline this DYK nomination. Considering that there are two other valid hooks, it is best to avoid the potential BLP issue. While I respect your right to disagree or ask for another review, I will not change my mind and I am moving

1472:

Thanks for the updates, and I see no further sourcing issues. For ALT1 I recommend changing the wording to match what is in the lead section, that is written and lectured. It's better to have similar wording in the hook and the article, so the reader is not on a treasure hunt to find it. Also, please

1438:

Article has been expanded fivefold as per the discussion above. Length is adequate. I agree with the sourcing style concerns mentioned by Nikkimaria, but those are not overly critical to DYK. My only sourcing concerns are the paragraph under the "Papers" header. I also made a minor copyedit to remove

179:

coverage of a banquet at the Met: "'There's a number of things I'd like to make off with if I could be sure I would be undetected,' said a smiling Ian D.D. Eaves, curator of The Armories at Her Majesty's Tower of London." Gandert 1982 and Nathe 2015 treat this seriously (e.g., Gandert: "The idea that

937:

as our rule of thumb: 40 or more words is a blockquote-sized quote, and should be blockquoted and thus not counted, so we don't include it regardless of formatting (though the various counting programs are not programmed to deal with this). As best I can determine, that second paragraph under Career

418:

In any case, I'm not sure if we can go with the hook since the hook fact is mentioned only in a footnote and not the article body itself (the article text itself is fairly vague on the incident in question and only briefly discusses it). Maybe we could try a different hook here? He seems to have had

658:

As mentioned above, his objection stood despite the explanation given. Personally I disagree with him and think that the sources given are enough, but again, unless he withdraws his objection, we can't go with the "thief" hook I'm afraid. I understand you really want that particular hook fact to be

636:

A nomination can't move forward without a good hook though, and when two reviewers agree that there is something wrong (even if may be for different reasons), then that is an argument that perhaps there is another way to move forward in this case. I'm willing to do a full review of the article, but

447:

Thanks. It's in a footnote because the subsequent treatment of Eaves's joke doesn't appear to have involved Eaves himself; because it's a discussion of how his words were taken out of context, not in context; and because spending a fourth of the "Career" section on a single comment would seem to be

1460:

the source you wanted for ALT2? It's a 2016 article about the publication of the work and states that Eaves got involved in 2000—hence the "nearly two decades." I've added an ALT3 ("mislabelled" to clear any confusion over his good name), and will add any that I can think of in the next day or so.

1455:

Added sources to "Papers." "Notes" was simply awaiting the reinsertion of the footnote, but I'll do that after this article runs. Changed "Currently" to "As of 2019," as the source (website of a publisher) still says he is a consultant. He has both lectured and published on the armor of Henry VIII

1686:

I considered disagreeing with the previous BLP concerns mentioned if the source wording and article wording were strong and succinct, but I don’t see the hook similarly mentioned in the article, and the quote you provided beside ALT0 is not explicit. I also have borderline reservations that the

577:

is welcome to address my response above, but I believe it adequately addresses any concerns that were expressed. Meanwhile, it remains unclear why an entire month has passed without more substantive feedback than 'please suggest more hooks as a backup.' If you are not interested in reviewing the

521:

thief, not a thief generally. This is supported by Nathe 2005, which states that "Book thieves can be overenthusiastic hobbyists, drug addicts, gamblers, politicians, priests, librarians, night custodians, building maintenance workers, PhD candidates, library benefactors, or historians. They may

1543:

Whichever words you want to use in that hook, please make sure the same words are mentioned in the article. For example "prospective thief" or "make off undected" et cetera. As an alternative, I think you should consider something like... Keeper of the armour, but did not keep his own armour

1228:

take a look at the article, especially the Career second paragraph, since she's perhaps the best expert we have on quoting and paraphrasing in the DYK space—she's who I consult whenever I'm wondering about sufficient expansions and not exceeding the proper amount of quoting from a source.

1619:

Great, I will abandon that suggestion. I have struck ALT3, ALT4 and ALT5 since the word thief specifically does not appear in the article, and is a BLP problem to avoid. If you have a different suggestion for the dinner party party, please post, or we can pursue ALT 1 and ALT2 instead.

1223:

had improved matters, including adding material, and I have made my own edit to remove the duplicate quotation and paraphrase a bit more of the material; I don't see that this shouldn't continue, though we can certainly get a new reviewer if you aren't interested. I have requested that

733:, you’re welcome to ask for another reviewer if you would like. If you are still interested in doing the review yourself, however, one option would be to check (and hopefully approve) all three hooks, and then let whoever promotes a hook to prep to decide which of the three to use. — 487:

For what it's worth, I find it hard to believe that anybody could be misled by this hook, or that it could become a serious BLP issue. However, I'm not seeing the claim that he was "labelled a thief", even jokingly. His comment was used to back up a claim that anybody

1634:, the word "thieves" appears in the article. I believe readers will know that this is simply the plural of thief? (Also, I'm not sure where this rule about every word in a hook must be in an article comes from; it's not one that you follow in your own nominations. 394:

I meant to say that it should be emphasized in the hook that the "labeling"/"mislabeling" was never intended to be serious. Plenty of serious disagreements and genuine accusations have been the results of jokes, so that not being the case here needs to be clear.

1558:, I've taken out "prospective" (and added an ALT5, also based on Nathe). The wording should now perfectly accord with that in the article. Meanwhile, your proposed hook runs into some trouble with the fact that Eaves does seem to collect himself. -- 429:, if you can point me to somewhere in the DYK rules where it says that hook facts cannot partly rely on footnotes, I will happily move the information from the footnote to the main text. Otherwise, I don't think it's an issue. Thanks, -- 351:

The phrase "to be labelled a prospective thief" specifically. Even if intended as a joke, readers may think otherwise until they read the article, and let's face it, not all hook articles are actually read by readers.

1244:

quoting comes close given the shorter length of the source). The material intended as paraphrasing also seems appropriate. The amount of quoting overall may be a stylistic issue, but that's not a reason to fail DYK.

691:, sounds good to me. I've added two hooks above. Assuming they all work factually, let's punt the decision to the promoter; it's probably a good idea, as you suggest, to let fresh eyes make that decision. Thanks, -- 1138:. At this point, based both on the rules, and whatever subjective metric is being used to weigh the "originality" of non-block quotations, I believe the length of the article is well within the 5x requirement. -- 180:

just about anybody is capable of theft is not farfetched. Take, for example, the statement of Ian D.D. Eaves..."). Eaves's comment was clearly a joke, as Katz 1983 points out (calling Gandert "a bit credulous").

680:

Honestly I think the best option moving forward would be to propose another hook (while keeping the original one as an option), then let a new reviewer decide between the two. It could work as a compromise.

829:

I was about to do a full review. I noticed that the readable word count before January 3rd (not including lists) was 2526, and after January 6th it was 7789. This appears to be only a threefold expansion?

292: 336:. What part concerns you? The hook makes it clear that Eaves was joking, and I think the article makes clear than it was ludicrous of Gandert to treat the comment — to a reporter, no less — seriously. — 1457: 227: 223: 1502:

5) Gandert and Nathe treated Eaves as a prospective thief; Katz called this "a bit credulous." If you would rather we not use synonyms, I've added an ALT4 which uses the "credulous" language.

93: 1265:

Full review needed now that length and quoting concerns seem to be addressed; reviewer should note that DYKcheck is overcounting the number of characters in the pre-expansion article.

440:

Just asked on WT:DYK and they said it should be acceptable. With that said, I'm not exactly sure why the information is in a footnote in the first place rather than the article text.

1569:

Sorry, I am confused. The article states: "Eaves has also collected armour himself; one of his former pieces is now owned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art." Please clarify.

851: 1761: 1025:; it bodes well that we’re now discussing hundreds of characters rather than thousands. At any rate, I’ve broken up the 40+ word quotations into MOS-compliant pieces. 624:

Full review needed. The above discussion pertains solely to the choice of the hook, which I am happy to revisit, if needed, in the context of a full review. Thanks, --

537:

In any case, would you be able to provide an alternate hook here that doesn't involve that incident? Just as a backup in case this "thief" thing doesn't work out.

88: 1029:, I would go ahead with the review. If for some reason—and reasons seem to keep appearing!—further expansion is called for, it should be insignificant. Thanks, — 1200:, the article now comprises some 10,426 characters. Even were we to remove from the count every single quotation from the second paragraph of "Career," which 1583:, that's correct. Thus Eaves has indeed kept armor himself, and may still do so. It is thus incorrect to say "he did not keep armour himself" or similar. -- 373:

Still not really fond of that label. How about rewriting the hook to emphasize the non-seriousness of the matter? Like showing that it was a joke?

982:, do you have any further expansion planned before I go ahead with a full review? I want to avoid doing more than one review if possible. Thanks. 1204:

appears most concerned about, the article would still be 9,380 characters long: 10 more than a five-fold expansion requires (9,370). --

36: 1642: 1638: 17: 1369: 1712:

I am approving ALT1 and ALT2. I wish you all the best in the future, and sincerely hope to see this nomination on the main page.

383:, I'm a bit confused. His comment is already termed a "dinner-party joke" in the hook; does that not show that it was a joke? -- 1377: 1135: 44: 1240:

On a quick look none of the quoting is so extensive as to cause concerns with regards to non-free content (although the

850:, that would be an ironic end to the discussion, wouldn't it? But block quotations are not included in the count (see 1345: 749:

a full review needs to be done. Discussions have only talked about hooks. Will do if nobody else does within a week.

269: 253: 237: 161: 143: 1649:

labelled a thief" would be a BLP violation when the "mis" makes it clear that the labelling was done in error. --

1395: 1323: 1312: 1131: 1127: 1740: 1654: 1613: 1588: 1563: 1537: 1512: 1466: 1209: 1154: 1143: 1034: 920: 873: 859: 738: 696: 674: 652: 629: 583: 557: 527: 453: 434: 410: 388: 367: 341: 306: 83: 595: 502: 1373: 793: 768: 730: 720: 688: 682: 666: 660: 644: 638: 604: 568: 549: 538: 441: 426: 420: 402: 396: 380: 374: 359: 353: 333: 322: 113: 1270: 1234: 1081: 943: 902: 195: 118: 1717: 1697: 1625: 1599: 1574: 1549: 1523: 1478: 1444: 1290: 1250: 1170: 987: 884: 835: 804: 779: 767:

Please feel free to review this as I have already recused myself from participating in this further.

754: 65: 1496:

3) The book was published in 2016; Eaves started work on it in 2000, so that's a 17-year investment.

1736: 1650: 1609: 1584: 1559: 1533: 1508: 1462: 1220: 1205: 1150: 1139: 1073: 1030: 979: 930: 916: 890: 869: 855: 826: 734: 692: 670: 648: 625: 579: 553: 523: 449: 430: 406: 384: 363: 337: 302: 589:

Please stop pinging me, I had read your response and it did not incline me to change my position.

590: 574: 514: 497: 1688: 103: 1357: 1518:

Are the words "prospective thief" anywhere in the book? Sorry for being very specific here.

1266: 1230: 1201: 1123: 1077: 1022: 939: 912: 898: 1594:

It is incorrect to state the present situation, because he may do something in the future?

1732: 1713: 1693: 1631: 1621: 1605: 1595: 1580: 1570: 1555: 1545: 1529: 1519: 1484: 1474: 1452: 1440: 1286: 1246: 1225: 1216: 1197: 1166: 1026: 983: 894: 880: 865: 847: 831: 800: 787: 775: 762: 750: 61: 1261: 934: 715: 620: 175: 40: 1278: 1165:

In reviewing the comments above, there does not appear to be a consensus to continue.

1755: 98: 1161: 218:

spent nearly two decades creating a catalogue of the arms and armour owned by Queen

29:

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.

1645:(no "switch"; no "official").) And I'm a bit confused why noting that someone was " 868:, added another 1023 characters, more than the 930 I believe was needed. Thanks, -- 321:

I am concerned about the wording of the hook because of possible BLP implications.

219: 191: 822: 578:

hook, I am happy to add the appropriate symbol to let someone else review this. --

1134:'s limitation on block quotations—and block quotations only—would seem to be the 719:

Thanks. Requesting another reviewer take a look and decide what hook to promote.

1708: 35:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as

1434: 974: 843: 317: 603:

As long as there are objections to that hook fact, then we can't go with it.

419:

quite an interesting career so there should be other things to choose from.

274: 258: 242: 214: 186: 166: 123: 1285:

starting a full review now... let's hope we can get through it this time.

1735:. Despite our differing perspectives, I appreciate your thoroughness. -- 879:

I will do a word recount when I get to a physical computer tomorrow.

567:

SpinningSpark raised an issue above regarding hook clarity, however.

47:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. 202:

Arms & Armour: in the Collection of Her Majesty The Queen

792:

It's been a week, this is probably ready for a new review.

1490:

1) Changed ALT1 wording ("studied" --> "written about")

1130:

is concerned only with public domain text, and in fact,

148: 1687:

entire passage about the dinner party jokes is given

1298: 206:

The Tournament Armours of King Henry VIII of England

108: 774:I will have a look next week if nobody else does. 492:become a thief, but that is not the same thing as 309:). Self-nominated at 07:44, 6 January 2019 (UTC). 637:the hook issue remains pressing at this point. 8: 230:: Eaves began in 2000, and it's a 2016 work. 190:has catalogued the arms and armour of Queen 49:No further edits should be made to this page 71: 1762:Passed DYK nominations from January 2019 1456:(the latter is covered in "Papers"). Is 74: 1544:collection" or similar witty wording. 1305:Article is new enough and long enough 517:, the hook says Eaves was labelled a 262:to be 'credulously' labelled a thief? 7: 1493:2) Placed cited sources next to ALT1 1499:4) Placed cited source next to ALT2 978:Sorry for the delay in responding. 170:to be labelled a prospective thief? 362:, how about "mislabelled" then? -- 194:, and written about those of King 173:Source: The joke is quoted in the 24: 45:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Did you know 18:Template:Did you know nominations 1707: 1433: 1408: 1399: 1381: 1361: 1349: 1327: 1316: 1277: 1260: 1160: 973: 862:) 23:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC) 842: 838:) 23:11, 28 February 2019 (UTC) 821: 782:) 05:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 757:) 01:25, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 714: 677:) 22:31, 10 February 2019 (UTC) 619: 316: 268:that a dinner-party joke at the 252:that a dinner-party joke at the 236:that a dinner-party joke at the 160:that a dinner-party joke at the 1487:, taking your points in order: 807:) 16:05, 28 February 2019 (UTC) 741:) 00:52, 11 February 2019 (UTC) 699:) 00:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC) 655:) 23:42, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 632:) 16:02, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 586:) 13:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 437:) 00:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC) 413:) 04:45, 18 January 2019 (UTC) 391:) 14:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC) 370:) 04:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC) 278:to be mislabelled a book thief? 32:Please do not modify this page. 1136:exception that proves the rule 796:13:29, 28 February 2019 (UTC) 771:04:53, 21 February 2019 (UTC) 685:23:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC) 663:00:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC) 560:) 17:00, 8 February 2019 (UTC) 530:) 23:50, 7 February 2019 (UTC) 456:) 20:26, 27 January 2019 (UTC) 344:) 03:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC) 293:Royal Artillery Mounted Rifles 1: 1641:(no "favored"; no "minded"), 1157:) 00:24, 3 March 2019 (UTC)) 723:00:24, 11 February 2019 (UTC) 641:23:30, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 571:04:11, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 444:10:44, 27 January 2019 (UTC) 423:11:32, 26 January 2019 (UTC) 399:00:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC) 377:12:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC) 356:03:40, 10 January 2019 (UTC) 1743:) 01:28, 14 March 2019 (UTC) 1720:) 18:54, 13 March 2019 (UTC) 1700:) 18:54, 13 March 2019 (UTC) 1628:) 22:07, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1616:) 20:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1602:) 19:54, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1591:) 19:40, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1577:) 17:42, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1566:) 09:55, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1552:) 09:46, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1540:) 05:55, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1526:) 03:44, 7 March 2019 (UTC) 1515:) 03:37, 7 March 2019 (UTC) 1481:) 03:18, 7 March 2019 (UTC) 1469:) 23:56, 6 March 2019 (UTC) 1447:) 23:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC) 1293:) 22:33, 6 March 2019 (UTC) 1237:) 23:03, 4 March 2019 (UTC) 1212:) 21:41, 4 March 2019 (UTC) 887:) 06:06, 1 March 2019 (UTC) 876:) 05:52, 1 March 2019 (UTC) 607:15:31, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 600:13:45, 9 February 2019 (UTC) 548:I would be happy to do that 541:14:21, 8 February 2019 (UTC) 507:19:52, 7 February 2019 (UTC) 325:03:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC) 68:) 07:23, 14 March 2019 (UTC) 1657:) 23:03, 8 March 2019 (UTC) 1416: 1273:) 18:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC) 1253:) 01:36, 5 March 2019 (UTC) 1173:) 18:59, 4 March 2019 (UTC) 1146:) 00:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC) 1084:) 22:15, 2 March 2019 (UTC) 1037:) 18:26, 2 March 2019 (UTC) 990:) 17:56, 2 March 2019 (UTC) 946:) 17:44, 2 March 2019 (UTC) 923:) 14:17, 1 March 2019 (UTC) 905:) 06:39, 1 March 2019 (UTC) 37:this nomination's talk page 1778: 799:Will do this later today. 270:Metropolitan Museum of Art 254:Metropolitan Museum of Art 246:to be mislabelled a thief? 238:Metropolitan Museum of Art 162:Metropolitan Museum of Art 1692:on from this nomination. 119:Find sources (notability) 94:Earwig's Copyvio Detector 1731:Thanks for the review, 1451:Thanks for the review, 41:the article's talk page 1072:I am very surprised, 109:A Simple Word Counter 89:Reviewer instructions 1370:copyright violations 200:Source: Eaves 2016 ( 114:Reviewers' template 1378:close paraphrasing 1340:Policy compliance: 1427: 1426: 1390:Hook eligibility: 1346:Adequate sourcing 1337: 1336: 794:Narutolovehinata5 769:Narutolovehinata5 731:Narutolovehinata5 721:Narutolovehinata5 689:Narutolovehinata5 683:Narutolovehinata5 667:Narutolovehinata5 661:Narutolovehinata5 645:Narutolovehinata5 639:Narutolovehinata5 605:Narutolovehinata5 569:Narutolovehinata5 550:Narutolovehinata5 539:Narutolovehinata5 442:Narutolovehinata5 427:Narutolovehinata5 421:Narutolovehinata5 403:Narutolovehinata5 397:Narutolovehinata5 381:Narutolovehinata5 375:Narutolovehinata5 360:Narutolovehinata5 354:Narutolovehinata5 334:Narutolovehinata5 323:Narutolovehinata5 310: 231: 209: 181: 132: 131: 1769: 1711: 1437: 1417: 1412: 1411: 1403: 1402: 1385: 1384: 1365: 1364: 1353: 1352: 1331: 1330: 1320: 1319: 1299: 1281: 1264: 1164: 977: 846: 825: 791: 766: 718: 623: 320: 300: 226: 199: 172: 72: 56:The result was: 34: 1777: 1776: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1643:Gilles Courteau 1409: 1400: 1382: 1362: 1350: 1328: 1317: 1296: 785: 760: 301:5x expanded by 212:ALT2: ... that 204:); Eaves 1993 ( 184:ALT1: ... that 155: 153: 149:Article history 137: 128: 104:Character count 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1775: 1773: 1765: 1764: 1754: 1753: 1749: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1737:Usernameunique 1724: 1723: 1722: 1721: 1702: 1701: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1651:Usernameunique 1610:Usernameunique 1585:Usernameunique 1560:Usernameunique 1534:Usernameunique 1509:Usernameunique 1505: 1504: 1503: 1500: 1497: 1494: 1491: 1463:Usernameunique 1425: 1424: 1415: 1414: 1405: 1387: 1386: 1366: 1355: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1332: 1321: 1307: 1306: 1283: Doing... 1275: 1274: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1254: 1221:Usernameunique 1206:Usernameunique 1195: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1151:Usernameunique 1147: 1140:Usernameunique 1102: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1095: 1094: 1093: 1092: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1074:Usernameunique 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1031:Usernameunique 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 980:Usernameunique 958: 957: 956: 955: 954: 953: 952: 951: 950: 949: 948: 947: 935:MOS:BLOCKQUOTE 931:Usernameunique 925: 924: 917:Usernameunique 907: 906: 891:Usernameunique 870:Usernameunique 856:Usernameunique 827:Usernameunique 819: 818: 817: 816: 815: 814: 813: 812: 811: 810: 809: 808: 743: 742: 735:Usernameunique 725: 724: 711: 710: 709: 708: 707: 706: 705: 704: 703: 702: 701: 700: 693:Usernameunique 671:Usernameunique 649:Usernameunique 626:Usernameunique 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 601: 580:Usernameunique 562: 561: 554:Usernameunique 543: 542: 534: 533: 532: 531: 524:Usernameunique 509: 508: 484: 483: 482: 481: 480: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 474: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 465: 464: 463: 462: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 450:Usernameunique 431:Usernameunique 407:Usernameunique 385:Usernameunique 364:Usernameunique 346: 345: 338:Usernameunique 327: 326: 303:Usernameunique 298: 297: 296: 295: 286: 281: 280: 264: 248: 232: 210: 182: 176:New York Times 152: 151: 146: 144:Back to T:TDYK 140: 138: 136: 133: 130: 129: 127: 126: 121: 116: 111: 106: 101: 96: 91: 86: 80: 77: 76: 54: 53: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1774: 1763: 1760: 1759: 1757: 1742: 1738: 1734: 1730: 1729: 1728: 1727: 1726: 1725: 1719: 1715: 1710: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1690: 1685: 1684: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1644: 1640: 1637: 1633: 1630: 1629: 1627: 1623: 1618: 1617: 1615: 1611: 1607: 1604: 1603: 1601: 1597: 1593: 1592: 1590: 1586: 1582: 1579: 1578: 1576: 1572: 1568: 1567: 1565: 1561: 1557: 1554: 1553: 1551: 1547: 1542: 1541: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1528: 1527: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1516: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1501: 1498: 1495: 1492: 1489: 1488: 1486: 1483: 1482: 1480: 1476: 1471: 1470: 1468: 1464: 1459: 1454: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1446: 1442: 1436: 1431: 1422: 1419: 1418: 1407:Interesting: 1406: 1397: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1379: 1375: 1371: 1367: 1359: 1356: 1347: 1344: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1325: 1322: 1314: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1304: 1301: 1300: 1297: 1294: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1280: 1272: 1268: 1263: 1259: 1258: 1252: 1248: 1243: 1239: 1238: 1236: 1232: 1227: 1222: 1218: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1211: 1207: 1203: 1199: 1172: 1168: 1163: 1159: 1158: 1156: 1152: 1148: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1036: 1032: 1028: 1024: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1005: 989: 985: 981: 976: 972: 971: 970: 969: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 945: 941: 936: 932: 929: 928: 927: 926: 922: 918: 914: 911: 910: 909: 908: 904: 900: 896: 892: 889: 888: 886: 882: 878: 877: 875: 871: 867: 864: 863: 861: 857: 853: 849: 845: 841: 840: 839: 837: 833: 828: 824: 806: 802: 798: 797: 795: 789: 784: 783: 781: 777: 773: 772: 770: 764: 759: 758: 756: 752: 748: 745: 744: 740: 736: 732: 729: 728: 727: 726: 722: 717: 713: 712: 698: 694: 690: 687: 686: 684: 679: 678: 676: 672: 668: 665: 664: 662: 657: 656: 654: 650: 646: 643: 642: 640: 635: 634: 633: 631: 627: 622: 606: 602: 599: 598: 594: 593: 588: 587: 585: 581: 576: 575:Spinningspark 573: 572: 570: 566: 565: 564: 563: 559: 555: 551: 547: 546: 545: 544: 540: 536: 535: 529: 525: 520: 516: 515:Spinningspark 513: 512: 511: 510: 506: 505: 501: 500: 496:him a thief. 495: 491: 486: 485: 455: 451: 446: 445: 443: 439: 438: 436: 432: 428: 425: 424: 422: 417: 416: 415: 414: 412: 408: 404: 401: 400: 398: 393: 392: 390: 386: 382: 379: 378: 376: 372: 371: 369: 365: 361: 358: 357: 355: 350: 349: 348: 347: 343: 339: 335: 331: 330: 329: 328: 324: 319: 315: 314: 313: 312: 311: 308: 304: 294: 290: 287: 285: 284: 283: 282: 279: 277: 276: 271: 265: 263: 261: 260: 255: 249: 247: 245: 244: 239: 233: 229: 225: 221: 217: 216: 211: 207: 203: 197: 193: 189: 188: 183: 178: 177: 171: 169: 168: 163: 157: 156: 150: 147: 145: 142: 141: 134: 125: 122: 120: 117: 115: 112: 110: 107: 105: 102: 100: 97: 95: 92: 90: 87: 85: 82: 81: 79: 78: 73: 70: 67: 63: 59: 52: 50: 46: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 1646: 1635: 1429: 1428: 1420: 1389: 1388: 1339: 1338: 1302: 1295: 1282: 1276: 1241: 1219:, I thought 1196: 1021:No worries, 820: 746: 618: 596: 591: 518: 503: 498: 493: 489: 299: 288: 273: 267: 257: 251: 241: 235: 220:Elizabeth II 213: 205: 201: 192:Elizabeth II 185: 174: 165: 159: 57: 55: 48: 31: 28: 1639:Lyle Wright 1324:Long enough 1267:BlueMoonset 1231:BlueMoonset 1202:BlueMoonset 1124:BlueMoonset 1078:BlueMoonset 1023:BlueMoonset 940:BlueMoonset 913:BlueMoonset 899:BlueMoonset 519:prospective 124:Hook length 75:DYK toolbox 1733:Flibirigit 1714:Flibirigit 1694:Flibirigit 1636:See, e.g., 1632:Flibirigit 1622:Flibirigit 1606:Flibirigit 1596:Flibirigit 1581:Flibirigit 1571:Flibirigit 1556:Flibirigit 1546:Flibirigit 1530:Flibirigit 1520:Flibirigit 1507:Thanks, -- 1485:Flibirigit 1475:Flibirigit 1453:Flibirigit 1441:Flibirigit 1374:plagiarism 1313:New enough 1287:Flibirigit 1247:Nikkimaria 1226:Nikkimaria 1217:Flibirigit 1198:Flibirigit 1167:Flibirigit 1027:Flibirigit 984:Flibirigit 895:Flibirigit 881:Flibirigit 866:Flibirigit 848:Flibirigit 832:Flibirigit 801:Flibirigit 788:Flibirigit 776:Flibirigit 763:Flibirigit 751:Flibirigit 266:ALT5: ... 250:ALT4: ... 234:ALT3: ... 196:Henry VIII 62:Cwmhiraeth 448:undue. -- 275:Ian Eaves 259:Ian Eaves 243:Ian Eaves 215:Ian Eaves 187:Ian Eaves 167:Ian Eaves 135:Ian Eaves 99:QPQ check 84:DYK check 1756:Category 1689:WP:UNDUE 1423:: Done. 1413:- ? 1404:- ? 1368:Free of 1354:- ? 1303:General: 592:Spinning 499:Spinning 332:Thanks, 289:Reviewed 58:promoted 1430:Overall 1358:Neutral 1132:Rule A2 1128:Rule 2b 852:Rule A2 494:calling 272:caused 256:caused 240:caused 164:caused 1376:, and 228:Source 1396:Cited 597:Spark 504:Spark 490:could 16:< 1741:talk 1718:talk 1698:talk 1655:talk 1626:talk 1614:talk 1600:talk 1589:talk 1575:talk 1564:talk 1550:talk 1538:talk 1524:talk 1513:talk 1479:talk 1467:talk 1458:this 1445:talk 1291:talk 1271:talk 1251:talk 1235:talk 1210:talk 1171:talk 1155:talk 1144:talk 1082:talk 1035:talk 988:talk 944:talk 921:talk 903:talk 885:talk 874:talk 860:talk 836:talk 805:talk 780:talk 755:talk 747:NOTE 739:talk 697:talk 675:talk 653:talk 630:talk 584:talk 558:talk 528:talk 454:talk 435:talk 411:talk 389:talk 368:talk 342:talk 307:talk 224:this 158:... 66:talk 1647:mis 1421:QPQ 1242:NYT 60:by 43:or 1758:: 1461:-- 1432:: 1398:: 1380:: 1372:, 1360:: 1348:: 1326:: 1315:: 893:, 291:: 222:? 198:? 139:( 39:, 1739:( 1716:( 1696:( 1653:( 1624:( 1612:( 1598:( 1587:( 1573:( 1562:( 1548:( 1536:( 1522:( 1511:( 1477:( 1465:( 1443:( 1289:( 1269:( 1249:( 1233:( 1208:( 1169:( 1153:( 1142:( 1080:( 1033:( 986:( 942:( 919:( 901:( 883:( 872:( 858:( 834:( 803:( 790:: 786:@ 778:( 765:: 761:@ 753:( 737:( 695:( 673:( 651:( 628:( 582:( 556:( 526:( 452:( 433:( 409:( 387:( 366:( 340:( 305:( 208:) 154:) 64:( 51:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index