Template:Did you know nominations/Victor Milner

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 Montanabw(talk) 23:34, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Victor Milner

edit
Victor Milner and Madeleine Carroll
Victor Milner and Madeleine Carroll

5x expanded by Amgisseman(BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 22:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC).

  • Some issues found. -  Done Taken care of. — Maile (talk) 00:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    • This article has been expanded from 763 chars to 3990 chars since 18:32, 04 June 2016 (UTC), a 5.23-fold expansion
    • This article meets the DYK criteria at 3990 characters
    • All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
    • This article has the following issues:
      • {{cn}} from July 2016
      • {{cn}} from July 2016
      • {{cn}} from July 2016 I placed verifiable inline sourcing in the article that took take of these. — Maile (talk) 00:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
    • A copyright violation is unlikely (8.3% confidence; confirm)
      • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
  • No overall issues detected

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This bot is experimental; please report any issues. This is not a substitute for a human review. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 23:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

  • The bot results check out, and the article is neutrally written with inline citations. The hooks are also sourced, and I AGF on the offline source. I did not find any close paraphrasing. I don't think ALT1 is interesting, but the other two are fine, and I like the original hook the best. I have a few issues with the article – IMDB is used as a reference in the lead, and the prose needs improvement in a few places. There are a lot of short sentences that should be combined, or given some more context. In particular, the second paragraph of the career section needs some work. Random86 (talk) 02:49, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Random86 Thanks for your review. I didn't realize that IMDB was still a source in the article, so I removed it. I tried to combine sentences in the paragraph you pointed out so that it would read better. However, I would like to point out that having short sentences is not against DYK and that should not be a reason that this article is not promoted. Amgisseman(BYU) (talk) 19:11, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
  • It wasn't just that the sentences were short – some of them lacked context or seemed unconnected to the rest of the paragraph. It is much more understandable now, IMO. This should be good to go. Random86 (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2016 (UTC)