Template:Did you know nominations/Jennie Patrick


 * 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 10:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Jennie Patrick

 * ... that as a student in 1964, chemical engineer Jennie Patrick helped to integrate Gadsden High School in Alabama?
 * Reviewed: Wilhelmina FitzClarence, Countess of Munster
 * Comment: Suitable for either Black History Month (February) or Women's History Month (March)

Created by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Self nominated at 17:50, 20 February 2014 (UTC).


 * I wanted to link Gadsden City High School in the hook, but I noticed that the school's article doesn't mention this history and it says it was established in 2004 - AND that Patrick is an alumni!! Not sure we could have a hook based on this area of doubt. Do you know what happened to the previous Gadsden City High School? Otherwise could I suggest Victuallers (talk) 22:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that! You're right, she would have attended Gadsden High School (Alabama), which was closed when it and other schools formed Gadsden City High School in 2004. Possibly one could use the original hook with the corrected name of the old school rather than the new one. The Gadsden article is a one-liner, though, so there's not much value in linking to it. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ... that Jennie Patrick, the woman who was told she did not belong at the University in Berkeley in the 1970s, received the Outstanding Women in Science and Engineering Award in 1980?


 * Symbol voting keep.svg Everything looks good here. Personally I prefer the second hook but both are verified. AGF for an offline source. 97198 (talk) 09:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)


 * For use on MainPage on March 17th? --PFHLai (talk) 06:21, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg 91798 please clarify what you mean by "Everything looks good". What exactly did you check for this DYK? I took a brief glance at the article and noticed some neutrality issues, eg. "She was driven by a sense of curiosity about how things worked" or " and found her way into a wider worlds through imagination". Please do a more thorough review. EagerToddler39 (talk) 14:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The two comments noted are paraphrases of statements in the cited references, in which her motivations are discussed. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg And those paraphrases need further fixing. The article sounds far from neutral. EagerToddler39 (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * From NPOV: "neutral point of view (NPOV) means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." The statements mentioned are evaluative, but they are referenced and sourced: can  you indicate where you consider them to be unfair or biased?  If the concern is that "statements of opinion can be presented only with attribution" and you want an explicit attribution in the text rather than just the inline reference, I can certainly do that. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I've gone in and neutralized the article somewhat, adjusting or eliminating those phrases I thought were not neutral. EagerToddler39 (talk) 03:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg I don't think "neutral" is meant to apply here as the author notes and the first reviewer didnt mention. One could argue that the phrases are not very encyclopedic (but are interesting to read), but claims of lack of neutrality are not supported. This is important as neutrality is important for a DYK review. If the article can merely be improved in tone then that is a matter for reviewers to approve and editors to improve later. This article and its hook are well referenced and of correct length and age. Ticked. Victuallers (talk) 10:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)