Template:Did you know nominations/E. Keith Eddington


 * 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 Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:32, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

E. Keith Eddington

 * ... that E. Keith Eddington was a graphic designer and portraitist who did work for clients including Cadillac, Transamerica, and Motorola?


 * ALT1:... that E. Keith Eddington was commissioned to design the current hymn book for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
 * Reviewed: Boyers Run

Created by Amgisseman(BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 22:03, 10 June 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg. The article is new (created on 10 June) and long enough. The article is about a talented personality. However, I am not convinced that the article meets WP:BIO, because it is almost fully based on a single article in a local newspaper. I suggest that more reliable sources should be cited to show that those criteria are met. The hook fact is accompanied by an inline citation to a collection of Eddington's own papers . I think the fact should be verified by an independent (reliable) source. Borsoka (talk) 11:38, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Borsoka The article actually relies on two newspaper articles for the information. The first hook is cited in the article by one of those newspapers. As for the second hook, I have provided another citation to the statement that he designed the hymnbook. The information about Monson commissioning the book was found in his personal correspondence, which I personally read. I also believe that the collection of Eddington's papers is a reliable source. They contain letters and correspondence papers that would be hard to imitate or exaggerate. And they are owned by Brigham Young University.Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 19:25, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg. Thank you for your message. I found the verification for both hooks in the second newspaper cited. No copyvio or close paraphrasing was detected. Borsoka (talk) 02:32, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I have pulled this from prep because of sourcing including what is cited for the hook. Two of the sources listed are Box 3, E. Keith Eddington papers, stored at the Brigham Young University. This is WP:NOR original research, that has not been published but is stored in a box at a university repository. You really need to be able to source the article and the hook with published Tertiary sources.— Maile (talk) 20:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * — Maile If I remove the information from those sources, will the article qualify for DYK? Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 20:11, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your quick response. A new review by a new reviewer would be needed to verify that it passes DYK. — Maile (talk) 20:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The sources were removed, and the article is ready for a new reviewer. Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 20:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New review needed now that two sources have been removed. — Maile  (talk) 20:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Both hooks are well-referenced to reliable sources and this nomination is good to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:28, 28 June 2016 (UTC)