Template:Did you know nominations/Elizabeth Byrd
- 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) 07:15, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Elizabeth Byrd
[edit]- ... that historical novelist Elizabeth Byrd was the editor of a salacious confession magazine in the 1950s? Source: Commire, Anne, ed. (1984). "Byrd, Elizabeth (1912–)". Something about the Author. 34. Gale Cengage. pp. 46–48. ISBN 978-0-8103-0063-7.
Created by Julia W (talk). Self-nominated at 13:22, 5 October 2018 (UTC).
@Julia W: Can you just make sure all paragraphs end in a citation and that there are no remaining BLP concerns? I removed or amended some passages that I could not find sources for, or where the sources did not cover the full extent of what is written in the article. HTH. Looks good otherwise. Samsara 08:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
New reviewer needed; previous reviewer has not responded and indeed hasn't edited Wikipedia since the date of the original review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueMoonset (talk • contribs) 13:25, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Query DYK rule D1 (WP:DYKDN) requires that the sentence in the article with the hook fact have an inline citation. I have marked it with a {{citation needed}} template. I know you've cited it above, but because it's an offline source and I don't have access to it I can't add it to the article myself. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Reidgreg, thank you! I've added two references now. One for her having been the editor and the second shows a cover of the magazine to highlight its "salacious" nature. Julia\talk 14:41, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Approved (AGF): Article was new enough at time of nomination, is long enough, neutral, and well-cited with no copyvio detected (AGF for offline sources). Hook is well-formatted, just over 100 characters, neutral, interesting, and supported with an inline citation in the article (AGF for offline source). QPQ verified. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Reidgreg, thank you! I've added two references now. One for her having been the editor and the second shows a cover of the magazine to highlight its "salacious" nature. Julia\talk 14:41, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
