- 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 Flibirigit (talk) 02:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Molly Morgan
edit... that Molly Morgan, a convict who had been transported to Australia twice, donated 100 pounds to help build a school?Source: http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/morgan-molly-2480- ALT1:... that Molly Morgan became the mistress of a captain so that she could escape her colony in Australia by ship? Source: https://www.southernhighlandnews.com.au/story/3179651/molly-morgan-convict-to-queen/
- ALT2:
... that Molly Morgan was transported to Australia as a convict twice, once for stealing yarn from a factory and again for burning her second husband's house?Source: https://www.southernhighlandnews.com.au/story/3179651/molly-morgan-convict-to-queen/ - ALT3:
... that Molly Morgan's obituary was the largest ever published at the time?Source: https://www.theherald.com.au/story/5517761/meet-the-hunters-queen-of-true-grit/
- Reviewed: I don't have 5 credits yet, so not necessary
- Comment: It's a very interesting topic; I can't decide which hook I like best, so I'll leave that decision to the reviewer. I'm hoping to get this to GA eventually, but that will probably take a while.
Moved to mainspace by SkyGazer 512 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC).
Substantial article on good sources, quite a story, no copyvio obvious. I like ALT1 best, think that ALT3 says too little, and feel that if original or ALT2 are used, "English" should be added somehow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: Thank you for reviewing/approving the article and for your comments. If the omission of her nationality is the only reason for not using the original or ALT2, they could easily be replaced with something like "that Molly Morgan, an English convict who had been transported to Australia twice, donated 100 pounds to help build a school?" or "that Molly Morgan was transported from England to Australia as a convict twice, once for stealing yarn from a factory and again for burning her second husband's house?" However, I don't hold any objections to doing ALT1 instead if you still prefer that even with the modifications to the original and ALT2.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:54, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the offers! It's not as much nationality as distance that I missed, although, on second thought, everything is far away from Australia. I still like ALT1 best (suited to raise curiosity for an unusual woman), while ALT2 is pretty much negative only about what she did, and the 100 pounds from the original seem relatively minor ;) - I'll watch though for other ideas.
- ALT1 for now, and if you are happy with that, we are done. Thank you for the contribution! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:53, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- ALT1 works great for me. Thanks!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 12:20, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
- And yes, Gerda Arendt, in response to this, I meant ALT1, not ALT2. Thanks for fixing that; apparently I can't count either!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 19:04, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
@SkyGazer 512: @Gerda Arendt: @Yoninah: apologies for the inconvenience, but I'm pushing this one back here because The Rambling Man spotted that most of the book references are lacking page numbers. Please could this be sorted out, then we can promote it back up again. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hey Amakuru. Almost all of the book references do in fact have page numbers; the only reason the single A-Z of Curious Shropshire: Strange Stories of Mysteries, Crimes and Eccentrics doesn't have one is because the online Google Books version of the book does not have page numbers. However, I had tried to make up for this by citing the name of the chapter as well as linking directly to a search for "Molly Morgan." Do you not think that's good enough verifiability for the purposes of DYK? Between what I did with citing the name of the chapter and specifying the link, as well as the fact that there are numerous other sources supporting the page content, including the hook, I'm surprised that this would be considered enough of a problem to have to pull it from the queue. However, if needed, I can try to find someone who has the book and see what they can do, but that would be rather difficult and I'm not sure how necessary it would be. :-)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:15, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
- @SkyGazer 512: @Narutolovehinata5: sorry for not responding earlier... I did see the ping, but at a time when I wasn't able to respond, and then unfortunately I forgot about it later. Thanks for reminding me. On the page numbers, Shipley was indeed the one I noticed that lacked them. I also didn't pick up on the link and snippets that you mention as when I click the link it's just going to the book's front page, I'm not seeing snippets. It's a bit tricky if you're reading it a reader that doesn't have them... I don't know what the accepted protocol is for that. Ordinarily I would say it's fine, but it is being used to support a large number of cites in the article (a all the way up to r). Are those all from the same page or chapter? I'll ask the question at T:DYK since I don't know whether this is a problem for DYK rules or not and we'll take it from there. (Also, as an aside, I'm probably visiting the British Library on Monday so I may be able to look up the page numbers in the printed book, if you can let me know what the cited passages are.) Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 09:16, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for responding; no worries, seeing a ping, meaning to respond, but later forgetting about it happens to me a lot. Wonder why the book link is going to the front page for you? When I click on the link, it goes to a search for the phrase "Molly Morgan" and displays 4 different pages with the title, 3 of which are in consecutive order, with the other not being available in the preview but looks like a table of contents, a brief mention, or something like that. The pages I'm using are the 3 consecutive pages about Molly Morgan, all of which, as mentioned in the ref when displayed in the bibliography section of the article, are within the section "Diddlebury – The Unsinkable Molly Morgan," starting with "Convict and landowner, Molly Morgan (1762–1835) was born in the village..." and ending with "... whose life story would surely grace any Hollywood blockbuster, died on 27 June 1835, aged 73." Does this help you out a bit, Amakuru? The section is quite specific, covering only 3 pages, all of which are used in the article, which is why I would think it would be sufficient verifiability for DYK purposes, especially because the URL is a link to the search.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:26, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- @SkyGazer 512: @Narutolovehinata5: sorry for not responding earlier... I did see the ping, but at a time when I wasn't able to respond, and then unfortunately I forgot about it later. Thanks for reminding me. On the page numbers, Shipley was indeed the one I noticed that lacked them. I also didn't pick up on the link and snippets that you mention as when I click the link it's just going to the book's front page, I'm not seeing snippets. It's a bit tricky if you're reading it a reader that doesn't have them... I don't know what the accepted protocol is for that. Ordinarily I would say it's fine, but it is being used to support a large number of cites in the article (a all the way up to r). Are those all from the same page or chapter? I'll ask the question at T:DYK since I don't know whether this is a problem for DYK rules or not and we'll take it from there. (Also, as an aside, I'm probably visiting the British Library on Monday so I may be able to look up the page numbers in the printed book, if you can let me know what the cited passages are.) Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 09:16, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
OK fine, @SkyGazer 512: I'm happy with that. Sounds like the relevant part would be easy to find for anyone with the book, which is the main thing. Re-marking as good to go. Thanks for following up on this. — Amakuru (talk) 15:00, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the approval, Amakuru. Speaking of getting pings and forgetting about them, the DYK housekeeping bot left a message on my talk page yesterday that the transclusion of this DYK nomination was incomplete, because it had been pulled but not added back to the queue, and I was going to fix it, but I kept getting distracted with other stuff, both in real life and on Wikipedia, and ended up forgetting about it. However, now the nomination is approved so I can't add it to Template talk:Did you know. Does this mean it should be added straight to Template talk:Did you know/Approved so that it can eventually be re-promoted?--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- @SkyGazer 512: what was stopping you adding it to Template talk:Did you know? I just tried adding it back to the nom page and it seemed OK. Do you think there'll be a problem with it? If it looks like it is stuck there or anything we can push it along by hand I'm sure... Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 16:07, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: What was stopping me previously was just me forgetting about it. The reason I didn't add it after you had approved this is because approved hooks are generally at Template talk:Did you know/Approved; Template talk:Did you know, afaik, is only for hooks that are awaiting approval. In this case, you had approved the DYK nom, so I didn't think the awaiting approval queue would be the appropriate place for this. I hope this is a bit better of an explanation? Thanks, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:14, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Looks like the bot has moved it now. I suppose that worked as well, just placing it in the awaiting approval queue and waiting for the bot to move it, apologies for not thinking about that. :-)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 22:05, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, that's what I was hoping would happen! As far as I know it just picks up the status based on the lowest places DYK symbol in the page. So my tick was enough to send it through. Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 22:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: What was stopping me previously was just me forgetting about it. The reason I didn't add it after you had approved this is because approved hooks are generally at Template talk:Did you know/Approved; Template talk:Did you know, afaik, is only for hooks that are awaiting approval. In this case, you had approved the DYK nom, so I didn't think the awaiting approval queue would be the appropriate place for this. I hope this is a bit better of an explanation? Thanks, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:14, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
- @SkyGazer 512: what was stopping you adding it to Template talk:Did you know? I just tried adding it back to the nom page and it seemed OK. Do you think there'll be a problem with it? If it looks like it is stuck there or anything we can push it along by hand I'm sure... Thanks — Amakuru (talk) 16:07, 22 November 2018 (UTC)