Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Langdon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 21:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Richard Langdon[edit]

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Corruption in Haiti
  • Comment: The position was briefly combined in 1661 and this is notified in the article. This is why I used the term "full-time". The source I used seemed to deem that the period in 1661 was "brief" and not worth counting.

Created by AtticTapestry (talk). Nominated by Jolly Janner (talk) at 04:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC).

  • @AtticTapestry: @Jolly Janner: "Full-time" is an assumption that I'm not sure is justified by the sources. 1661 to 1762 is a full century though, so why not just use that number instead? Gamaliel (talk) 23:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Gamaliel. That is a valid criticism and I have slightly tweaked the original hook and proposed it as an alternative. Jolly Ω Janner 04:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Jolly Janner. I tweaked your new hook a bit. I think this is ready to go if you are okay with ALT2. Gamaliel (talk) 18:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Fine by me. I just wanted to avoid the word century twice in one sentence. I'm sure it'll get edited in the prep/queue if needed. Thanks. Jolly Ω Janner 04:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Oops, I hadn't noticed that! Changing it back. Gamaliel (talk) 05:36, 11 March 2016 (UTC)