A fact from Ethel Maynard appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 November 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article was accepted on 30 September 2020 by reviewer Sulfurboy (talk·contribs).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil Rights Movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil Rights Movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Civil Rights MovementWikipedia:WikiProject Civil Rights MovementTemplate:WikiProject Civil Rights MovementCivil Rights Movement
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nursing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Nursing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NursingWikipedia:WikiProject NursingTemplate:WikiProject NursingNursing
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article was created or improved during the following events hosted by the Women in Red project. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red
@Eddie891: Thank you for the quick comments. I am okay with the copyedits you have done, I will try and find the dates for the commission in Newspapers.com and get back to you on that, sadly there is most likely no way for me to find out the dates for the eighteen years part, and lol it is just a force of habit to write "committeeman" and I just fixed the error. As for 3 I got it as a result from here [4] which is an official government website. Jon698 (talk) 22:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Jon698 I'd like you to incorporate more info from [5] and [6] and to see if [7] has any resources to get information though again I don't think that the state library of arizona blog is reliable by itself. As the article stands, it is not comprehensive enough to become a GA, but it's close. Placing on hold. Best, Eddie891TalkWork20:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article is short, but as far as I can tell comprehensive. It's reasonably well written, well sourced (to reliable sites and everything I checked lined up), images look good, no evident copyvio or close paraphrasing. Passing. Eddie891TalkWork12:26, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Article is new enough and long enough. It is neutrally written, and free of copyright violations that I can find. Hook fact is verified by the source, and is cited in the article. I would recommend linking "black" both in the lead and the hook; I would also recommend adding when her term was to the lead. QPQ is pending. Some slight redundancy in the article lead, but that's not enough to hold up the DYK. Vanamonde (Talk)21:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say they didn't know who black people were, I said it would add clarity and context. The history of race relations in the US is not universally known; the term "black" is also still considered offensive in some places (though not, of course, in the US at the moment). We don't add a link in every article, but it's logical to add a link when being a black person is central to an understanding of the person's legacy. Why are you opposed to adding a link? Vanamonde (Talk)01:30, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Because it is pointless and not necessary. Anybody looking at the article can clearly tell it is about black people in the United States and more specifically in Arizona. Jon698 (talk) 01:38, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jon698:, please take a moment to reconsider. You've written a decent article about a consequential figure. I'm asking you to add a link that would help readers understand why she was consequential. Are you seriously saying you'd rather have this not appear on the main page than add a link to African American to your hook? Vanamonde (Talk)02:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jon698: That's a reasonable compromise, but in that case, I'd recommend piping the link to "first black woman", rather than just "black woman"; it's less confusing that way. Vanamonde (Talk)02:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Article is new enough and long enough. It is neutrally written, and free of copyright violations that I can find. Hook fact is verified by the source, and is cited in the article. I would recommend linking "black" both in the lead and the hook; I would also recommend adding when her term was to the lead. QPQ is pending. Some slight redundancy in the article lead, but that's not enough to hold up the DYK. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
All my concerns addressed. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)