Template:Did you know nominations/USS Marcellus (1879)
- 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 Allen3 talk 13:08, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
USS Marcellus
[edit].jpg)
- ... that USS Marcellus was struck from the Navy list on the same day that her first captain, Herbert Winslow, was retired from active duty?
- Reviewed: Benjamín Pardo
Created by KMJKWhite (talk). Nominated by Buggie111 (talk) at 19:00, 19 March 2015 (UTC).
Sufficient prose length; under 200 characters (slightly tweaked for accuracy); appears neutral; reliable sources used and hook cited (and specifically checked for verifiability); spot check found no copyright infringement; created within the past five days. So, it appears good to go on those bases (and is quite a well-written article!) I've added the image from the article to this DYK.The only issue I see is the possibility of (obviously unintentional, if present) plagiarism. Though most of the article is cited to sources, there are a few sentences trailing paragraphs that have no citation. and the entire Acquisition and commissioning section is unsourced. I then note you have in the references that it incorporates text from the PD Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships. That's fine but any copied content (or content that is closely paraphrased with very few changes) still needs to be cited to avoid plagiarism, and if not a true paraphrase, must be in quotation marks, be attributed in the text and have an inline citation after the quote. Please address this issue.
Since I've had a look at the article, I'd note here a few other things that should have no bearing on its eligibility for DYK, but are fresh in my mind. All paper sources should not have accessdates (i.e. where the citation is to a published newspaper or books that will not change ever, as opposed to an online only source that could be updated anytime). I added page numbers to the two citations involved in the hook but the same should be done for all the cited sources, where applicable.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:59, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- Would have sworn that with DANFS it was fine to add the disclaimer to the bottom of the article. Will do. Buggie111 (talk) 20:24, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
- I added additional sources for the Acquisition and commissioning section, as not all of it came from DANFS. I appreciate the help with this article, and also the tips about referencing and accessdates KMJKWhite (talk) 01:38, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Everything looks good to go!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:16, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
