Template:Did you know nominations/Constance Leathart

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 PFHLai (talk) 14:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Constance Leathart edit

(

)

... that the RAF pilot Constance Leathart (1903–1993) was one of the first women to fly over the Alps, and that she flew heavy bombers in World War II?

Created by GiantSnowman (talk) and Yngvadottir (talk). Nominated by Drmies (talk) at 23:50, 15 October 2015 (UTC).

I don't know if I need to do a review for an article I didn't write, but I did one anyway: Template:Did you know nominations/Grakliani Hill.

Thanks @Drmies: for this - I'd always intended to go back to the article to expand and eventually bring to DYK myself but that pesky real life got in the way..! Giant Snowman 08:51, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

You have a secret admirer, GS. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Created on 9 Oct, nominated on 15 October/new enough. 1745 char/long enough. Neutral. In line citations. Unable to access source 1 so must AGF no copyvios in it and DOB/DOD (or you could strike the dates from the hook). First part of hook citation also appears to be a direct quotation from the source but not in quotations? Both text and source state "one of the first women to fly over the Alps in a De Havilland Tiger Moth." No other apparent copyvios. Hook at 143 char is below maximum and is interesting. No photo. QPQ done. SusunW (talk) 03:00, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

SusunW, thanks--I can access that source, and it confirms the dates. As for the hook, I copied it from the article, and now I see the source. I think that WP:LIMITED applies here. I mean, I can change "over" to "across" but that won't make much of a difference, and putting it in quotes seems a bit overdone. GiantSnowman, can you find a way to rephrase it in the article and the hook? I'm not feeling very inventive today. Drmies (talk) 15:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Drmies and GiantSnowman: today I can access cite #1. Last night it kept saying something about overloaded database and I couldn't even access it via Wayback. Thus, no copyvios there and dates confirmed. I don't think you need to worry about the wording in the hook as it is not the entire quote, but in the article it is exactly the same and either needs to be in quotes or reworded. SusunW (talk) 15:21, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

I also can't think of a way to re-word it, sorry. Giant Snowman 16:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Then it's a quote and so marked in the article. Good to go. SusunW (talk) 16:30, 30 October 2015 (UTC)