Template:Did you know nominations/Dallas Equal Suffrage Association

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) 06:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Dallas Equal Suffrage Association[edit]

(

)

... that on "Traveling Salesman Day" at the 1915 Texas State Fair, the Dallas Equal Suffrage Association convinced visiting salesmen to wear badges proclaiming "Votes for Women"?

ALT1:... that when the Dallas Equal Suffrage Association first registered women voters, one registrant said she had been waiting for voting rights "since the Civil War"?
ALT2:... that the first president of the Dallas Equal Suffrage Association was Margaret Bell Houston, the granddaughter of Margaret Lea Houston and Sam Houston?
ALT3:... that the Dallas Equal Suffrage Association submitted 10,000 Dallas County women's signatures requesting support for women's voting rights only at political party conventions and in primary elections?
Reviewed: Katherine O. Musgrave

Created by Megalibrarygirl (talk). Nominated by Maile66 (talk) at 19:07, 24 May 2016 (UTC).

New enough and long enough. Neutral, good citation density, and no evidence of close paraphrasing. QPQ done, and no image to evaluate. Hooks all seem to meet guidelines, although my favorite, ALT2, is only indirectly mentioned in the article. I'd probably go with the main hook as the next most interesting, although I really found the part about Representative Miller changing his stance based on the number of petition signatures to be the most fascinating part of the article. Maybe you could work up another hook relative to that? Even if not, I think this is good to go. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, ALT3 is actually in reference to the Miller demand, minus the part where he demanded 5,000 signatures. I've tried it several ways, but it was just too long. And it loses its fizz if you say he demanded the signatures, and they over delivered, without saying what the signatures were for. So, ALT3 was the only version that was not more than 200 characters long. — Maile (talk) 14:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

What about

:*ALT4... that Representative Barry Miller, a former women's suffrage opponent, became a champion of the cause when the Dallas Equal Suffrage Association secured 10,000 signatures favoring equal voting rights?"

That squeaks in under the limit, if it's accurate, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acdixon (talk • contribs) 15:39, 25 May 2016

Yeah, that works as far as ~~accuracy and~~ length. Visually, it puts the politician at first glance, and the DESA at the tail end. I'd prefer a hook where the DESA is the first mention in the sentence. Anything you can do with that thought? — Maile (talk) 15:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

And, oh yeah, it wasn't "equal voting rights". The House Bill on the floor limited women's voting rights to political party nominating conventions, and state primary elections. They were not being allowed the right to vote in the general election, or, apparently, any other type of election. — Maile (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

What about:

ALT5... that a Dallas Equal Suffrage Association petition convinced Representative Barry Miller, a former women's suffrage opponent, to become a champion of the cause?

If one of these doesn't work, no problem using the first hook. This was just the bit that stood out to me. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 16:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

That's getting a little closer, but Miller only agreed to chair the Texas House of Representatives caucus on women's suffrage. In theory, maybe he had to be impartial. It's hard to tell by the source, but his chairmanship would have come from the House, not the DESA. — Maile (talk) 18:58, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps it's better to use the first hook, then, rather that convey inaccurate information in an attempt to meet the length requirements. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 20:30, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the quick review, anyway. And thanks for all the good ideas. We just could never get the wording correct, but it wasn't for lack of trying. — Maile (talk) 20:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

NOTE FOR PROMOTERS This nomination passed. All 4 hooks are verified. The reviewer tried wording an additional hook, but it wasn't do-able within the 200 character limit. The reviewer's preference is the main hook, but as the nominator I'm fine with any of them. — Maile (talk) 00:06, 30 May 2016 (UTC)