Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a23798b18dcb36cd

Jump to content

Talk:Charles Mompesson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 21 days ago by Beta Beta Beta in topic Did you know nomination

Did you know nomination

[edit]
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. Track your hook after promotion. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Beta Beta Beta (talk) 03:26, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

  • Source: D. W. Hayton. "GAUNTLETT, John (c.1643-1719), of Netherhampton, and Hungerford's Chantry, the Close, Salisbury, Wilts". History of Parliament Online. Retrieved 3 June 2026.
"In the election of that year he and William Nicholas* (third son of Sir John) stood on the Tory interest at Wilton, only to be defeated by Gauntlett’s next-door neighbour in Salisbury, Charles Mompesson*, and another Whig."
Moved to mainspace by GoldenBootWizard276 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 18:51, 4 June 2026 (UTC).Reply

@Dclemens1971: Done. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 20:09, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I take, will review in the next 24 hours.--Launchballer 20:14, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Lots to whinge about here I'm afraid @GoldenBootWizard276:. The two QPQs are not complete because they do not mention copyright or whether the hooks verify, but I'll accept them as you're new. Articles are new enough and technically long enough, although neither deserve lead sections and removing them will take them under 1500. Earwig is clean. Gauntlett contains uncited content, please reference. What makes either of these two meet WP:GNG, given that they each comprise two sources with one used for not very much at all?--Launchballer 23:41, 4 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Launchballer: Some more sources have been added. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 07:24, 5 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Launchballer: status update? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 04:29, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Can't see anything wrong with either now.--Launchballer 05:06, 28 June 2026 (UTC)Reply