Template:Did you know nominations/Anarchism without adjectives
- 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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 11:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Anarchism without adjectives
- ... that some anarchists reject adjectives?
- Source: Esenwein, George Richard (1989). "Anarquismo sin adjectivos". Anarchist Ideology and the Working-class Movement in Spain, 1868-1898. University of California Press. pp. 134–154. ISBN 978-0520063983.
- ALT1: ... that anarchism without adjectives has been described as an ecumenical or non-denominational form of anarchism? Source: Esenwein, George Richard (1989). "Anarquismo sin adjectivos". Anarchist Ideology and the Working-class Movement in Spain, 1868-1898. University of California Press. pp. 134, 137. ISBN 978-0520063983.
- ALT2: ... that anarchism without adjectives was formulated to counter sectarianism and dogmatism in the anarchist movement? Source: Esenwein, George Richard (1989). "Anarquismo sin adjectivos". Anarchist Ideology and the Working-class Movement in Spain, 1868-1898. University of California Press. pp. 134–137. ISBN 978-0520063983.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Jill, Duchess of Hamilton
Improved to Good Article status by Grnrchst (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 45 past nominations.
Grnrchst (talk) 09:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC).
Article was promoted to GA recently enough. I'm going to trust that the GA review addressed any content and sourcing concerns. WP:EARWIG says copyvio is unlikely. All three hooks are good, but the latter two might be a bit wordy and verbose, and the first one is punchier. This seems good to go to me! Di (they-them) (talk) 05:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- I've been asked to check the sources some more, so I'll just update my review and say that I don't see any immediate sourcing or content concerns. Di (they-them) (talk) 00:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
