Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Malacca (1641)

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 SL93 (talk) 21:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Battle of Malacca (1641)

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that despite losing almost one thousand men capturing Malacca in 1641, the Dutch East India Company did not invest much time or energy into it afterward? Source: Liquid Market, Solid State: The rise and demise of the great global emporium at Malacca, 1400-1641 — "For their part, the Dutch let Malacca play second fiddle to Batavia, expending minimal time and energy on the new colony." The Siege and Capture of Malacca from the Portuguese in 1640-1641 — "We lost in the siege a little under 1,000 men killed in action and dead through the epidemics."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Paint Drying

Improved to Good Article status by An anonymous username, not my real name (talk). Self-nominated at 22:21, 29 November 2022 (UTC).

•  Reviewing... Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:54, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @An anonymous username, not my real name: Good article. Hook is interesting, article is sourced, and the QPQ is done. Approving. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:04, 30 November 2022 (UTC)