Template:Did you know nominations/Constance Peel


 * 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 11:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Constance Peel

 * ... that, after losing a child, journalist and author Mrs. C. S. Peel abandoned writing to sell hats, but started up again after ill health forced her to close her shop?

Created by J Milburn (talk). Self nominated at 20:07, 29 January 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Reviewed against the criteria:
 * Article nominated same day as creation
 * Long enough: 3994 characters (647 words) "readable prose size"
 * Within policy – meets core policies and guidelines:
 * neutral
 * cites sources with inline citations
 * →although there is one citation per paragraph, I will assume good faith on the offline citations; if you can add more citations that would be great
 * free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism
 * →although another editor raised copyvio and paraphrasing concerns, these do not appear to be borne out when checked
 * Hook is 148 characters, is interesting and it meets formatting guidelines, however:
 * →the hook should have an inline citation immediately after it to save readers having to check which citation it might be
 * →it might be better to change from a piped link to just the article name being linked
 * →I also think you've got room in the hook to add that she was a writer
 * QPQ – will wait for you to review another nomination
 * Well written article needing maybe a couple more sources, an inline citation for the hook, tweak or two to the hook wording and a QPQ review. Green Giant (talk) 23:13, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. I'm not really clear why you feel the article needs more sources- are you unhappy with the sources cited? I've added a footnote as you asked, and modified the hook. I disagree with changing the piped link- she wrote under that name, and, in any case, gives a good feel for the kind of thing she was writing. J Milburn (talk) 23:35, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response, despite the disclaimer in your talkpage. The hook citation is fine and the rewording is good. Leaving it as a piped link is fine by me, I just thought maybe sticking to one name or the other. The reason I mentioned more sources is that the article has four citations, if which three are offline and one requires subscription. There's not a whole lot for readers to go on, so a couple more online accessible sources would be good. Also, unless I am mistaken, you have several DYK credits, and therefore we need your review of another nominee. Green Giant (talk) 00:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Feilden J Milburn (talk) 17:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. I have added google book links for two of the sources. Green Giant (talk) 19:19, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Would all involved be happy to move this to International women's day on March 8 Victuallers (talk) 23:18, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Great idea! J Milburn (talk) 23:40, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Are you sure there are no copyvios? It is discussed in my talk page. --George Ho (talk) 02:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC) Oh well, many say that there is no copyvio, so let's go for their word against mine. George Ho (talk) 04:12, 31 January 2014 (UTC)