- 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 Z1720 (talk) 18:35, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Julia Dawson
Clarion Van No. 1
- ... that Julia Dawson's first Clarion Van (pictured) was named for Scottish socialist Caroline Martyn? Source: mentions Martyn and of course her name is in the photo
- ALT1: ... that journalist Julia Dawson's Clarion Vans spread the socialist word to British women? Source: as above
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/National Women's Day (Pakistan)
- Comment: QPQ = 2 of 2 part hook. If you see an error fix it. All changes welcome... but if you can see how the hook might be tweeked (to fit with how you would have written it) when its in the queues for the main page then please look for a more constructive edit.
Created by Madeleineog (talk). Nominated by Victuallers (talk) at 11:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
- "Clarion Van number One was named for Caroline Martyn" appears with a citation only as the caption to the image on the page. I would recommend repeating this information and citation in the main body of the text.
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
@Madeleineog and Victuallers: A very nice article! Good to go with a couple of minor changes. 1st, see above. 2nd, Wikipedia's manual of style recommends using double quotes around quotations, so it would be desirable to change from single quotes to double quotes throughout the article. My preference would be for the ALT as more hooky, as it leaves the reader wondering just what the vans were for. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 13:24, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mary Mark Ockerbloom and Victuallers: Thanks for the review Mary. Your points are useful, but obviously neither of these are essential for DYK approval and and I think this is important to note as we will make DYK more inaccessible if new articles have to comply not only with DYK requirements but every "nice to have" in an article. I notice that you don't make the changes, this is allowed, but I've made them anyway. She seems like an interesting woman so nice to see that she now has an article and the vans are now mentioned more widely. Thx again. Victuallers (talk) 15:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
All issues resolved, Very Nice! Thank you. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 18:51, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Victuallers and Mary Mark Ockerbloom:
any reason for me to be concerned that this article has five citations to a wordpress blog and another three to a blogspot blog? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 12:36, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
- Do you need a reason? Surely that is a rhetorical question. Are you expecting one of us to admit that the other dozen or so references are all a cover? No idea why you are asking this. <--- yes this is a rhetorical statement. I do not need to chat about it. ThanksVictuallers (talk) 13:54, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Victuallers and Mary Mark Ockerbloom:
