Template:Did you know nominations/Carol Lee Flinders

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 Allen3 ^talk 13:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Carol Lee Flinders

(

)

~~... that Carol Lee Flinders coauthored Laurel's Kitchen, recently described as a "renowned countercultural cookbook"?~~

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ralph Garr
Comment: Although I prefer my primary suggested hook (above), here are some alternative hooks (variations on a theme) that could be used if the primary suggested hook is regarded as inadequate:
ALT1: ... that in 1976, Carol Lee Flinders coauthored Laurel's Kitchen, recently described as a "renowned countercultural cookbook"?
ALT2: ... that Carol Lee Flinders coauthored Laurel's Kitchen (1976), recently described as a "renowned countercultural cookbook"?
ALT3: ... that Carol Lee Flinders coauthored Laurel's Kitchen, described in 2009 as a "renowned countercultural cookbook"?

Created/expanded by Presearch (talk). Self nom at 21:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Another hook, that I'd be inclined to use as more interesting than the first 4, is:
ALT4: ... that Carol Lee Flinders, coauthor of the "renowned countercultural cookbook" Laurel's Kitchen, has also written books on spirituality, mysticism, and feminism?

Needs reviewing. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:00, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Every paragraph needs a reference. There are also no references for the list of works. Secretlondon (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Secretlondon, for your review. I've added inline citations to make sure that every paragraph in the main prose part of the article has citations. With regard to the reference sections, I wonder if this is a place where we should let common sense take over? (The DYK Guide and its citation page seem to call the inline citation requirement simply a "rule of thumb," after all.) In as much as the reference sections can hardly be called unreferenced, it seems to me that they are in conformity with the essential requirement for appropriate citation (in fact, it's hard to see how to incorporate inline citations in those sections without seeming a trifle ridiculous and perhaps bureaucratic, although if you see a straightforward way to proceed, I'm open to it). What do you think? Thanks -- Presearch (talk) 19:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

The rule of thumb is a minimum of one inline citation per para. I certainly wouldn't pass anything without that. Linking at the top of the works section to an article with a list of works? Secretlondon (talk) 22:38, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, the article now includes inline citations for every paragraph in the "Works" sections. Please note that the article does not claim that any of these lists are complete and inclusive of everything she's ever published (although I suppose they might be complete - I think I included everything that came up in online searches). So please take another peek. Many thanks. -- Presearch (talk) 01:29, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

This is okay now. ALT3 and ALT4, but I prefer ALT4. Secretlondon (talk) 22:37, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Great! Since I too prefer ALT4, I will strike out all the others so as to encourage the usage of ALT4. Of course, if ALT4 has unexpected problems, then the prep editors could always use ALT3.
Also, here's a spontaneous thought: Since the hook is partly about food/cooking, and since US Thanksgiving is only 3 days away, why don't we
run this hook on US Thanksgiving (Thu 22 Nov)?
--Presearch (talk) 04:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)