Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas Crawford (captain)
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Allen3 talk 17:44, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
Thomas Crawford (captain)[edit]
- ... that Thomas Crawford captured Dumbarton Castle with ladders?
- Reviewed: Cornelius Smelt
Created/expanded by Wikiwayman (talk). Self nom at 10:47, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
ALT1 ... that Thomas Crawford was Provost of Glasgow?
- Prose size (text only): 967 B (161 words) before 9 Nov 2011 and 7346 B (1252 words) on 14 Nov 2011.
- ALT1 was already on Wikipedia (albeit unreferenced). Retracted Wikiwayman (talk) 13:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
- ALT2 ... that a former Provost of Glasgow captured Dumbarton Castle?
- ALT3 ... that six years after capturing Dumbarton Castle, Thomas Crawford became Provost of Glasgow?
Wikiwayman (talk) 13:25, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
The 5x expansion really started on the 9th November but apart from that, length and hook are fine. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
- I think that a more interesting hook would be:
- ALT4 ... that Thomas Crawford captured Dumbarton Castle with ropes and scaling ladders at dead of night?
- Happy to go for ALT4. Wikiwayman (talk) 20:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Article incorporates significant verbatim and near-verbatim copying from a source without correct citation or attribution. See Duplication Detector report for examples. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
- Several edits made to article to rephrase or attribute text. Wikiwayman (talk) 11:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
- Better, but given that you're mixing free and unfree sources, you need to use more citations to indicate more clearly which material is from where. This is an interesting side effect of our policies on public-domain text: if the entire article were from that single source, the attribution template you added would be sufficient, but since it isn't, you need to clearly indicate what material that template covers. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
- More work done on re-phrasing to eliminate mixed sources - all can now be referenced by the public source (the other appears to be a re-phrasing of it anyway), but it's been re-phrased (to be different from both) not copied. Wikiwayman (talk) 17:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
- Better, but given that you're mixing free and unfree sources, you need to use more citations to indicate more clearly which material is from where. This is an interesting side effect of our policies on public-domain text: if the entire article were from that single source, the attribution template you added would be sufficient, but since it isn't, you need to clearly indicate what material that template covers. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
- Seems to be in rather good shape now. I re-added an attribution template to be on the safe side regarding sourcing. The article is extensively revised from the PD source, but it's difficult to tell the story of the assault on the castle without using essentially the same sequence of events that is given in the source. --Orlady (talk) 16:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)