Template:Did you know nominations/Eleanor Elkins Widener
- 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 Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:38, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Eleanor Elkins Widener
[edit]... that after rowing a Titanic lifeboat and honoring her drowned son with a Harvard library, Eleanor Elkins Widener waited on a yacht (pictured) while her second husband fought "scantily-clad, ferocious cannibals"?
Created by EEng (talk), Hertz1888 (talk). Nominated by EEng (talk) at 02:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC).
(BTW, for the record, just reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Australian Renewable Energy Agency. EEng (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
New enough, long enough. No close paraphrasing or copyvios found. 3 DYKs done, so no QPQ needed. However, there are five outstanding tags in the text that need addressing. Some of the tagging is a bit pedantic, but five is probably too many to be left in for a DYK. The hook does cram a lot in! She should be mentioned sooner in the hook, and on first reading (which is all most users will do), it perhaps sounds as if she was on a yacht with her second husband, while her first husband and son were drowning. Edwardx (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, I forgot that DYK likes to project the illusion that 5-day-old articles aren't works in progress. Therefore, instead of leaving in minor, uncontroversial points -- tagged as [citation needed] in the hope that someone will be inspired to find the cite -- I'll just take that material out so that when the article appears on the main page, interesting facts will be missing but people will ooh and ahh at how tag-free the article is, thus getting a completely distorted view of the typical timeline of article development. In other cases I'll add cites to low-quality, barely-reliable sources -- again giving the appearance that the article is "done" even though more work is really needed. I'll also remove the [clarification needed] tags, thus pretending that material that probably could be clarified is really as good as it could be; again, no one will notice and readers will be amazed at how apparently perfect the article presents itself to be, even though it's not, actually. These are the beneficial side-effects of DYK's 5-day/0-tag guidelines. EEng (talk) 23:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
- OK, take a look now, please. EEng (talk) 02:31, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Despite my earlier dyspepsia (though I don't withdraw the sentiment) I appreciate the trouble taken in doing the review. However, I'd like to hear if others share the same concerns about the hook -- I don't see it. EEng (talk) 03:18, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
- ALT1: ... that eight years after rowing a Titanic lifeboat and honoring her drowned son with a Harvard library, Eleanor Widener waited on a yacht (pictured) while her new husband fought "scantily-clad, ferocious cannibals"?
(per suggestion of the estimable Hertz) EEng (talk) 21:26, 26 April 2014 (UTC))
Thank you. The new ALT1 hook avoids any possibility of misinterpretation. One small tweak - replaced "8" with "eight". And the two tags in the article are about very minor things; she died 77 years ago, so nothing like BLP sensitivity needed here. Good to go. Edwardx (talk) 15:39, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
