Template:Did you know nominations/Charmian Gooch

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) 06:19, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Charmian Gooch

(

)

... that Charmian Gooch's work with Global Witness in exposing the conflict diamond trade inspired the 2006 film Blood Diamond? Source: This Evening Standard article.
- ALT1:... that Charmian Gooch's investigation into the timber trade between the Khmer Rouge and Cambodia deprived Pol Pot of approximately $90 million a year, leading to the defection of the Khmer Rouge and their eventual downfall? Source: This Guardian article.
- ALT2:~~... that Charmian Gooch's investigation into the timber trade deprived Pol Pot of $90 million a year, leading to the defection of the Khmer Rouge and their eventual downfall?~~ Source: This Guardian article.

Comment: Article 5X expanded by User:Sasha.sov Apologies for nominating slightly late.

5x expanded by Sasha.sov (talk). Nominated by Jaobar (talk) at 04:35, 30 December 2016 (UTC).

Note: I have struck ALT1, since at 221 characters it was well above the 200 character maximum for a hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Response: Dear BlueMoonset, thank you for pointing this out. I have reduced the character count for the hook and created a second alternate. I hope this is acceptable. Best, --Jaobar (talk) 15:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Or consider ALT3, which is even tighter, with an important wiki link restored and the relevant countries named. —Patrug (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

ALT3:... that Charmian Gooch's investigation into the Cambodian timber trade deprived Pol Pot of US$90 million a year, leading to the eventual downfall of the Khmer Rouge regime? Source: This Guardian article.

Dear Patrug, thank you for providing an alternate hook. I agree that ALT3 is an improvement over ALT2. We'll see what happens! Best, --Jaobar (talk) 15:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:33, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

This article is a five-fold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The ALT3 hook is sourced inline and the article is neutral. Earwig produced rather high percentages, but many of these were quotations and others were the names of organizations and much used phrases and I think the article passes the close paraphrasing test. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I disagree. Much has been put in quotes, but there are still instances of close paraphrasing which really can and should be rewritten in your own words:
Source: after lobbying G-8 members to embrace transparency
Article: After lobbying G8 members to embrace transparency
Source: Since 2010, Global Witness has worked with a coalition of NGOs lobbying political leaders in London, Brussels and Washington to force companies to identify their ultimate, or beneficial, owners.
Article: Beginning in 2010, Gooch and Global Witness started working with a union of non-governmental organizations aimed at lobbying political leaders in major cities such as London, Brussels, and Washington to force companies to identify their ultimate owners.
Source: Through tactics such as undercover investigations and high-level lobby meetings,
Article: Through the deployment of various tactics such as undercover investigations and high-level lobby meetings
Source: has run pioneering investigations and campaigns uncovering the links between natural resources, corruption and conflict.
Article: It has become a pioneer in investigations and campaigns related to uncovering the links between natural resources, corruption, and conflict.
In general, the article quotes snippets from the sources far too much; sentences should be rewritten and rephrased in your own words. Wikipedia articles are often used by college students and all these quotes are going to look strange in a term paper. The article has a strong tone of self-promotion as well. Yoninah (talk) 17:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

There has been no response in three weeks, and close paraphrasing is a serious issue. Marking for closure, though if the issues raised are responded to here before the nomination closes and addressed on the article, the review can resume. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Dear BlueMoonset, Yoninah and others, thank you for your note and for your patience. Let me contact the editor and give this another try. I'll email as soon as I complete this note. Best, Jaobar (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Dear Yoninah and BlueMoonset, all noted examples of close paraphrasing have been addressed. I will take another look through tonight and see if the quoting issues can be addressed. Thanks for your patience. --Jaobar (talk) 21:54, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Dear Yoninah and BlueMoonset, a variety of quotes are now paraphrased. I hope this addresses your concerns and that we can move this process forward. Please let me know if you have any additional concerns. Best, Jaobar (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, @Jaobar:, for addressing the close paraphrasing issue. No close paraphrasing seen. Restoring tick per Cwmhiraeth's review. Yoninah (talk) 00:06, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

The ALT3 seems well suited for International Women's Day. Yoninah (talk) 23:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Agreed! By the way, looks like we may have a picture uploaded to the commons at some point today/tomorrow (hopefully). Would be great to include Charmian for International Women's Day. Can we make this happen? Best, Jaobar (talk) 14:38, 7 March 2017 (UTC)