Template:Did you know nominations/Sociopolitical issues of anatomy in America in the 19th century


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Sociopolitical issues of anatomy in America in the 19th century
Created/expanded by KaylaMa (talk). Self-nominated at 17:08, 9 March 2017 (UTC).
 * ... that in the  19th century, riots prompted by medical grave-robbing ended up shaping Am erica's current laws on cadaver acquisitions?


 * Could you fix the nomination? For example, you didn't link the article in the hook. HaEr48 (talk) 05:52, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have fixed my nomination, is this better now? Thanks so much for the help! KaylaMa (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment, No, not much better, & not good enough. Please look at the rules and other examples. And on Wikipedia "our" covers the world not just the US. The hook probably needs an "American" somewhere. Johnbod (talk) 17:40, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that hook has been updated. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:48, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ALT1 ... that America's current laws on cadaver acquisitions followed  19th-century riots over medical grave-robbing? - snappier, & gives a meaningful main link. Johnbod (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg But, "America's current Anatomy Act 1832 piped to "laws on cadaver acquisitions"", links to a British act of Parliament! Johnbod (talk) 16:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I have removed the link to the British act! KaylaMa (talk) 16:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review still needed now that a snappier ALT1 has been proposed. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:47, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg The article was created on 8 February. No edits were done till 26 February and majorly developed by 27 February. DYK nominated on 9 March. So considering 7 day nomination rule, article should have been DYK nominated on 16 February for new article and 6 March for 5x expansion. I believe, it does not satisfy the date range criterion. - Vivvt  ( Talk ) 07:00, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * For a start, it was in a sandbox until 26th Feb, so all clocks start then. As a first article by someone in a student project the extra 3 days don't bother me personally. Some of the text is tagged & needs rewording. Johnbod (talk) 14:28, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Review Symbol confirmed.svg Timely nominated (close enough) in my estimation. Long enough.   Cited reliable sources support ALT1 and are in line.  No need for QPQ. Earwig is clear.  No issue of plagiarism or close paraphrasing.  Created a lead paragraph.  I cleared up the tags, rephrased and clarified the article, and improved the formatting of the citations.  Hook is interesting and neutral.  All paragraphs cited. GTG.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 18:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)