Template:Did you know nominations/Vernon County Jane Doe
- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:10, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Vernon County Jane Doe
[edit]- ... that Vernon County Jane Doe's true identity has remained a mystery since 1984?
5x expanded by Gourami Watcher (talk). Self nominated at 00:47, 15 October 2014 (UTC).
Article created on 13 October and submitted here two days later. Article is around 1850 characters (2250 including spaces) and thus complies with the length requirement. Article is neutral and has inline citations with numerous sources. Concerning the hook: I have removed the word "the" from it, which seemed unnecessary. Hook is short enough and complies with guidelines. It also interesting, although logical that a Jane Doe is unidentified. Although you did not use the word mystery in your article the meaning of "Her true identity has never been discovered" is the same. No QPQ done, but I can't see if you have done more than 5 DYKs as of yet.
- I have some issues with some of the referencing done. I'll give two examples: "In Westby, Wisconsin, the body was found on the night of 4 May 1984 by three teenagers within 24 to 48 hours after her death". In the reference going with that sentence the body was discovered six miles outside of Westby, also the teenagers aren't mentioned, nor the time of death. And the other example: "She had a blunt force injury to the head, which had broken her dentures, and her hands were removed, likely to prevent identification through fingerprinting." The used source says nothing about the blunt force injury, nor dentures. Please check if you used the correct sources for each citation. Crispulop (talk) 10:48, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
- Alright! the citations have been reorganized in the spots that you suggested. Thanks for letting me know! --GouramiWatcherpride 17:01, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
