207:
297:
211:
the wedding cakes of
Elizabeth and Phil. To be frank, I was suprised enough to see the size and height of the main cake. And it is also of great interest that the couple were restricted because of post-war rationing etc. But putting that obvious problem aside, I don't see any evidence of the cakes (plural) being subject of any authoritative work or news source. It seems to be to be
215:(though very well done) to create a Knowledge (XXG) article about all the cakes, without demonstrating they have collectively been a subject of study, or interest by others. Unless maybe this is intended as a list article. I've raised the problem on the article Talk page. I'd welcome a second opinion on whether it's a valid topic at all.
244:
I agree that the hook is so tangential to the article that it shouldn't be used, especially since there are so many possibilities, so I've struck it. I feel that Sionk is onto something with approaches such as be the size and height of the main cake (nevertheless less smaller than it might have been
210:
Article is new enough, long enough, does not appear to have been copied from elsewhere and is prolifically sourced using well formatted inline citations. I'd love to be able to approve this. However, a couple of things trouble me. The most obvious problem here is that the suggested hook is not about
94:
245:
due to the rationing and ingredient shortages); a valid use of
Victoria might be the dozen cakes total for Elizabeth vs. over 100 for Victoria (again because of the shortages), or the sending of slices back overseas in thanks for the supplied ingredients from there.
300:
The nominator hasn't edited since
October 28 and did not respond to any comments on this nomination as well as a ping. Unless they return or another editor adopts this, there does not appear to be a path forward for the nomination at this time.
40:
169:
Source: Crumbs make 107-year link. Miss F M Findrey of 2 Oak
Terrace, Cheltenham has sent a packet containing crumbs from Queen Victoria's wedding cake to Princess Elizabeth as a wedding present.
162:
36:
338:
89:
321:
289:
17:
230:
The subject is notable. I remember seeing a documentary on the cakes. They interviewed many of the people involved in making them.
44:
317:
285:
144:
170:
84:
302:
270:
114:
250:
119:
65:
236:
185:: This is my first time submitting a DYK nomination - apologies if I have got something wrong.
104:
246:
61:
220:
197:
212:
70:
No response to issues despite multiple pings in over a month; closing as unsuccessful.
332:
231:
99:
206:
29:
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.
296:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
264:
216:
193:
171:
https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000669/19471108/062/0003
124:
47:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page.
136:
Princess
Elizabeth and Philip Mountbatten's wedding cakes
163:
received crumbs from Queen
Victoria's 1840 wedding cake
149:
160:... that when Princess Elizabeth married in 1947 she
200:). Self-nominated at 06:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC).
109:
8:
49:No further edits should be made to this page
339:Failed DYK nominations from September 2022
72:
75:
7:
68:) 05:26, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
24:
45:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Did you know
18:Template:Did you know nominations
295:
223:) 19:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
205:
241:00:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify this page.
324:) 22:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
292:) 00:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
253:) 01:34, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
1:
135:
37:this nomination's talk page
355:
120:Find sources (notability)
95:Earwig's Copyvio Detector
41:the article's talk page
110:A Simple Word Counter
90:Reviewer instructions
115:Reviewers' template
201:
173:
133:
132:
346:
312:
309:
306:
299:
280:
277:
274:
268:
239:
234:
209:
191:
168:
73:
56:The result was:
34:
354:
353:
349:
348:
347:
345:
344:
343:
329:
328:
327:
310:
307:
304:
278:
275:
272:
269:Still with us?
262:
237:
232:
156:
154:
150:Article history
138:
129:
105:Character count
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
352:
350:
342:
341:
331:
330:
326:
325:
293:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
225:
224:
189:
188:
187:
186:
180:
153:
152:
147:
145:Back to T:TDYK
141:
139:
137:
134:
131:
130:
128:
127:
122:
117:
112:
107:
102:
97:
92:
87:
81:
78:
77:
54:
53:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
351:
340:
337:
336:
334:
323:
322:contributions
319:
315:
314:
298:
294:
291:
290:contributions
287:
283:
282:
266:
261:
260:
252:
248:
243:
242:
240:
235:
229:
228:
227:
226:
222:
218:
214:
208:
204:
203:
202:
199:
195:
184:
181:
178:
175:
174:
172:
167:
165:
164:
158:
157:
151:
148:
146:
143:
142:
126:
123:
121:
118:
116:
113:
111:
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
82:
80:
79:
74:
71:
67:
63:
59:
52:
50:
46:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
303:
271:
190:
182:
176:
161:
159:
57:
55:
48:
31:
28:
247:BlueMoonset
192:Created by
125:Hook length
76:DYK toolbox
62:BlueMoonset
166:as a gift?
238:(discuss)
100:QPQ check
85:DYK check
333:Category
233:Hawkeye7
177:Reviewed
58:rejected
183:Comment
311:hinata
305:Naruto
279:hinata
273:Naruto
265:BJCHK
217:Sionk
213:WP:OR
194:BJCHK
16:<
318:talk
308:love
286:talk
276:love
251:talk
221:talk
198:talk
66:talk
60:by
43:or
335::
320:·
288:·
140:(
39:,
316:(
313:5
284:(
281:5
267::
263:@
249:(
219:(
196:(
179::
155:)
64:(
51:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
