Template:Did you know nominations/Rose Laure Allatini

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion 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: rejected by BlueMoonset (talk) 04:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Article too short and other issues (including bare urls not noted below).

Rose Laure Allatini[edit]

Created by Tom Morris (talk), Edwardx (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC).

  • New (19th), barely long enough, not within policy (see below), no copyvio found via tool, QPQ done. Recurring copyvio/close paraphrasing issue as mentioned in other DYKs and talk page, e.g.,

    she was prone to repetition from one book to another, and in later novels her popular tone became sensational, then clichéd both in style and incident
    — source

    Allatini's prose she was prone to repetition from one book to another. In her later novels, her popular tone became increasingly sensational, and clichéd both in style and incident.
    — WP article

    Let's work together to make sure these issues don't crop up in the future, because this kind of close paraphrasing requires rewriting the article. Please ping me if I don't respond. czar  15:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I've removed the copyvio that User:Edwardx seems to have introduced. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:31, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Still need to check the other additions for close paraphrasing, but wanted to note that the article is too short now (under 1,500 characters) and needs to be expanded. czar  15:10, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. I scanned through the diffs that User:Edwardx made. London Gazette and 1911 Census are just data sources, there's pretty much no prose to closely paraphrase! I've removed a bit more close paraphrasing. As for the length: as I said, I'm not sure I can make it longer than 1,500 characters based on the sources to hand (which is why I didn't nominate it). —Tom Morris (talk) 17:00, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
No response from nom and still too short czar  01:55, 17 November 2013 (UTC)