- The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 00:28, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Created by Poeticbent (talk). Self nominated at 20:22, 23 November 2013 (UTC).
- New enough, long enough, hook content cited in article, which is well cited generally. Image is widely used on Wikipedia in several languages. Edwardx (talk) 11:23, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
- @Poeticbent: I suggest adding a by whom to the end of the hook. At the moment it isn't clear who actually denied it. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- The article explains it. The perpetrators are already named and linked; no-one else would have a stake in denying the facts. In my opinion, there's no need to say it twice. Poeticbent talk 08:34, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- I just think that it's a bit too ambiguous at the moment, in terms of whether its part of the Commission, the Soviet Union, the world, the Polish. What about something like: "were denied by the Soviets for seventy years"? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- I see your point, but we are running into a problem here. The article says "in November 2010 the Russian State Duma admitted" to Soviet responsibility, however, the Soviet Union disintegrated a decade earlier. So the denial continued beyond the Soviet "60" and on to "70" mentioned in the hook. Poeticbent talk 09:35, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- When reviewing this nom, I did consider adding "by the Soviets", but as Poeticbent states, who else would have an interest in denying it? I also realised that there was the possibility for Soviet/Russian confusion, so decided to leave it as it stands. In any event, the hook doesn't have to tell the whole story. Edwardx (talk) 10:35, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, all good points. Probably not worth the gain to try and work out another word (or more likely phrase would be). So this is good to go. for ease of viewing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)