Template:Did you know nominations/William Vane, 2nd Viscount Vane

The following discussion 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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

William Vane, 2nd Viscount Vane edit

(

)

... that the Viscount Vane's offer of a reward in the newspapers for information about his eloped wife was compared to a search for "some favourite spaniel bitch"?

Reviewed: Karl Beck (tenor)

Created by Surtsicna (talk). Self nom at 18:52, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

The article is new and long enough (2,157 characters). It is within policy. The hook is not too long (154 characters). AGF for offline sources. OK. --Antidiskriminator (talk) 12:58, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the paraphrasing on the ODNB source is a bit close, with several near exact phrasing: compare for example "Lord Vane was infatuated with his wife, while she did not hide her contempt for him" vs "Lord Vane was infatuated with his beautiful young wife, but Frances made no secret of the fact that she despised her second husband", or ""His expensive attempts to win back his wife and the requirement to support two households, one of which was run by the erratic Viscountess Vane, soon ruined him financially. He was forced to live as a debtor, give up his country seat in Kent, sell an estate in Staffordshire" with "Lord Vane's expensive attempts to recapture his wife, and his requirement to support her erratic lifestyle and separate household, had forced him to live as a debtor within the rules of the king's bench for a period, to let his country seat in Kent, and sell his estate in Staffordshire". Nikkimaria (talk) 13:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I see. I've revamped the entire Marriage section. Is it sorted out now? Surtsicna (talk) 14:09, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

I was unable to check the copyright violations and plagiarism because I could not open the link at ODNB. It says "Oxford DNB subscription required". Therefore I had to AGF. Thank you Nikkimaria for noticing this.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 14:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

ODNB source is now clear, don't have access to other sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Good to go with AGF for the offline sources.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)