Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Carson Breckinridge

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: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Mary Carson Breckinridge

(

)

... that Mary Carson Breckinridge's work with the Frontier Nursing Service dramatically reduced infant and maternal mortality in Appalachia at a comparatively low cost? Source: ([Dye, Nancy Schrom (Winter 1983). "Mary Breckinridge, The Frontier Nursing Service and the Introduction of Nurse-Midwifery in the United States". Bulletin of the History of Medicine. 57.4: 485–507 – via JSTOR]).
- ALT1:... that Mary Carson Breckinridge modeled the Frontier Nursing Service on European models, based on her post-war work with the American Committee for Devastated France and her tour of The Highlands and Islands Medical and Nursing Service in Scotland. Source: [(Breckinridge, Mary (1952). Wide Neighborhoods: A Story of the Frontier Nursing Service. Univ of Kentucky Press)].
- ALT2:... that Mary Carson Breckinridge's model for public health in rural Kentucky placed trained nurse-midwives at the center of the system? Source: [(Breckinridge, Mary (1952). Wide Neighborhoods: A Story of the Frontier Nursing Service. Univ of Kentucky Press)].
- ALT3:~~... that the nurse midwives in Kentucky traveled many miles on horseback to serve the women and families who were inaccessible by road or rail?~~ Source: [(Norman, Macdonald (2014). The great book of Skye : from the island to the world : people and place on a Scottish island. Maclean, Cailean. Portree. ISBN 978-0952868798. OCLC 897503159)].

Reviewed: "QPQ exempt"

Improved to Good Article status by JECason (talk). Self-nominated at 21:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC).

Nominated within 7 days of receiving GA icon. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. However, there are numerous statements that need sourcing, as well as a whole paragraph that needs citations per Rule D2.
ALT0 is interesting. Please tell me the page number on which the hook fact appears so I can check it. ALT1 and 2 read very technically and not so interestingly. I have struck ALT3 because it's a shame not to mention the subject specifically on the main page. No QPQ needed for nominator with less than 5 DYK credit. Yoninah (talk) 14:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I will double check citations and respond very soon with more information.JECason
The citation to lowering infant and maternal mortality appears on pages 501-02 of Dye's article. The whole article narrates the intentional process of achieving that goal, but the goal is reported and cites to the historical record on those pages. I'm still a novice editor going through this process of the first time. I'll check on placing a page number inside the article as well, but if I should be responding with a page number somewhere other than here, please let me know. JECason —Preceding undated comment added 21:21, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

@JECason: Thank you for the page numbers. Where does it say anything about low cost?
There are still a number of "citation needed" tags that need to be taken care of. Yoninah (talk) 20:38, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

The nominator is no longer editing. Marking this nomination for closure as unsuccessful, although if the nominator reappears before the template is closed, we can continue. Yoninah (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

I think we should wait another week and see what happens. Two weeks since the nominator's last edit isn't really that long. I am curious how the article passed a GA review with multiple areas not cited. Flibirigit (talk) 16:28, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: I looked at the GA review and I wouldn't call it much of one. SL93 (talk) 23:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Flibirigit, Yoninah, SL93 is absolutely right. This was a GA review by a first-time reviewer who passed it even having mentioned some issues in their review, which were not required to be fixed. Further, with a single paragraph lead section in an article of its size, it failed to meet MOS:LEAD, one of the GA criteria, in addition to the citation issues. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The nominator edited yesterday so I left one final message for them. If there's still no response in a week this can probably be closed as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Nominator has not returned since their last edit and has been unable to respond to messages. Given this along with concerns about the initial GA review, unless another editor decides to adopt this nomination, it is now marked for closure as abandoned. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 13:48, 7 August 2020 (UTC)