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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football 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.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
William Lofland Dudley is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Vandy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Vanderbilt University 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.VandyWikipedia:WikiProject VandyTemplate:WikiProject VandyVandy articles
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 was copy edited by Miniapolis, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on October 9, 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Chemistry is likely my worst academic subject. From what I understand, Dudley was praised for explaining that the aurora borealis was neon gas, while today it's known not to be neon but work via the same process as a neon light, which is probably the point which Dudley got praise for elucidating. Please do clean this up if you can; to any interested, the man's scientific work leaves no shortage of material for the scientifically inclined. Cake (talk) 21:21, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
Well cited.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
Appears fine; some are not available for me to check.
Images of a CO molecule, a football player who played under his administration, and a festival which he helped lead are tangential at best. In this case, less might be more.
7. Overall assessment.
Quickfail due to the close paraphrasing, which is entirely inappropriate. The rest will get a cursory evaluation as a courtesy.
While I do not quick fail things lightly, the fact that the nominator appears to be the one who has engaged in the close paraphrasing really don't leave me any other choice. With regrets, Jclemens (talk) 05:30, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the review. All good points. No hard feelings about the fail. I would not submit it for review if its passing were guaranteed. Dudley is one of the more interesting guys whom I have tried to beef up on wikipedia. My interest with the sporting figures has me attempt to struggle with the chemistry. There are apparently quite a few chemists in the history the sport, such as Knute Rockne, but I digress. Will try to pare down his football legacy, and avoid plagiarizing Traughber (not the intention of course, but it shows my need to review the sources if nothing else). Hopefully then it can attract more. Cake (talk) 06:03, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
this, leaving aside the direct quotes which are appropriately attributed, should give you a guide to where the close paraphrasing hits. See WP:Close paraphrasing for more tips and guidelines--when copying large amounts of stuff from one site, it often takes conscious effort to reframe and rephrase things entirely, rather than just rearranging and rejiggering a thing or two. Since that site lists a 2005 publication date, I doubt it's adapted from an article started in 2014. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 07:44, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's a great tool. The English is probably even clumsier now, but hopefully ~50% seen by a computer is enough to avoid the charge. Cake (talk) 23:42, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
Well cited.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
Appears fine; some are not available for me to check.
