Template:Did you know nominations/Theodosia Trollope


 * 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 97198 (talk) 02:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Theodosia Trollope

 * ... that visitors to the Florentine villa of Theodosia Trollope thought it less intense than the nearby home of Elizabeth Barrett Browning?
 * Reviewed: QPQ = Pocahontas School

Created by Victuallers (talk). Self nominated at 17:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg This well-written article is new enough and long enough. The sentence to which the hook refers starts "Comparison's of the two households concluded that ..." which I think is expressed awkwardly, after all, a comparison cannot think or indeed conclude anything!. If it were to say something to the effect "Visitors comparing the two households ..." I could approve the hook, although I tried in vain to view page 90 of the source. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:45, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review Cwmhiraeth but I'm a bit confused as to what we can do. Obviously I cannot correct the source's English, but I'm sure I understand the meaning. If it is totally ambiguous then can someone suggest an alt hook? Victuallers (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Well I understand what it means but it doesn't seem good grammar to me. How about
 * ALT1 ... that visitors to the Florentine villa of Theodosia Trollope found the atmosphere less intense than that at the nearby home of Elizabeth Barrett Browning? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:45, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thx.Fine by me Victuallers (talk) 14:04, 27 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check ALT1 hook, and complete the earlier review, which doesn't mention sourcing, neutrality, or close paraphrasing checks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg I started going through the sources but didn't have time to finish. Footnote 4 says she was born in 1824, not 1816. Yoninah (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Footnote 4 does say 1824, but it hints that this date is based on gossip about whether her mother could have given birth at her age in 1824. But the ODNB, which is much more reliable source, gives her date of birth as 1816, when her mother was 8 years younger. As the 1824 date is not asserted by a reliable source but merely supports 200 year old gossip then I don't feel it should be included. Thanks for the time you gave Victuallers (talk) 00:05, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg OK. I finished looking at the page and it reads well. Article is new enough, long enough, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in online sources. ALT1 hook ref AGF and cited inline. QPQ done. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 00:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)