Template:Did you know nominations/Emily C. Gorman


 * 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 Yoninah (talk) 23:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Emily C. Gorman

 * ... that Emily C. Gorman increased enlistment in the 1960s by allowing female soldiers to live in private, lockable barracks they could personalize and decorate with items from home?



Created by EmilyvstheGorn (talk). Self-nominated at 13:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Article length, article date, and lack of close paraphrasing verified. No QPQ needed because this is the nominator's first DYK submission. However, the sentence "Through the policy, female soldiers were also permitted to decorate and personalize some areas of their living space" is sourced to:   I was unable to verify this information on page 187 of the book. Would you fix the page numbers?  Otherwise, there are no other problems. This was an excellent read; thank you for this contribution, ! Cunard (talk) 00:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded two public domain photos of the subject at File:Stephen Ailes and Elizabeth C. Gorman May 1963.png and File:Mary E. Kelly, Viola B. Sanders, Elizabeth Ray, Elizabeth C. Gorman, Colonel Kelly, Margaret M. Henderson January 1963.png. One of them might be worth including in the DYK. The only concern is the image must "show up well at small size (100 × 100px)", which can be rectified if the images are cropped. Cunard (talk) 01:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Verified. Fixed by the nominator. Cunard (talk) 01:18, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and the photos. Yay you submitted it. Congrats! It's just a typo on the page number. I found it at 197. (discussion starts on 196). SusunW (talk) 01:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Where does it say in the book that her efforts increased enlistment? Yoninah (talk) 10:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The entire chapter I lifted the detail from is about increasing WAC enlistment. I've looked through the text again to find a sentence directly linking the two concepts, but I can't find anything concise. If that's too much of a stretch, can I still leave the article up for DYK nomination by editing the sentence? What if it says:
 * ALT1: ... that Emily C. Gorman changed military regulations in the 1960s to allow female soldiers to live in private, lockable barracks they could personalize and decorate with items from home?
 * Yes, you could change the hook, but all the citations to that book reference pages 196 and 197 only. If the various pieces of information were taken from the whole chapter, please give the page range for that chapter. And the new hook fact should also be included in the article. Yoninah (talk) 17:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg I apologize to you and am sincerely sorry that your very first submission and nomination went like this and that you were not given any more support or coaching. I failed you as did other editors. I have inserted page references for your citations and while I do not know if the way I do it is the way everyone does it, it works and you can copy it on future articles. I didn't know how to input citations when I started either. Wikipedia instructions are hard to follow and I had to depend on the kindness of other editors to show me how to input individual pages in a multiple paged document. The citation for her increasing enrollment by 12% is in the book on page 193. The bloody articles are NOT more important than the editors working on them. I sincerely apologize to you and am restoring the original approval. If because I input page numbers that in some way violates DYK policy for me to approve the hook which I had nothing to do with writing, then I would hope that someone else would immediately retick the file. SusunW (talk) 19:16, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

you've been incredibly helpful and encouraging, thanks for looking through my article and for suggesting I consider DYK! I am so relieved that you found the point I was looking for in my cited book. And yes, I hadn't quite learned how to include different page numbers within a single citation, or how to include several citations sourced to a numerous pages of a single book. I've figured it out in the meantime, thanks to the comment from Yoninah. Can I do anything else to help this process? Thanks, EmilyvstheGorn (talk) 21:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Unless someone halts it again, it should now go to prep and appear on the front page soon. Fingers crossed. Glad to see your enthusiasm hasn't waned. IMO until women represent 1/2 the articles in Wikipedia we haven't done our jobs properly. If we are half the world we are half the history as well. SusunW (talk) 22:00, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, for finding the hook refs in the book, and for fixing up the citations. you might want to try Harvard referencing next time you have a lot of cites from the same book. The full citation, placed in a "Sources" section at the end, looks the same as a regular citation, with the addition of "ref=harv". The citations in the text are pretty short, e.g.  , with the page number changing accordingly. Using this system, a reader can click on the abbreviated citation in the "Notes" section and be redirected to the full citation. You can see how I used Harvard referencing in this article: Schwester Selma. You can always drop a note on my talk page if you have any questions. Best, Yoninah (talk) 09:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)