Template:Did you know nominations/Victoire Conroy

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 Miyagawa (talk) 10:19, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Victoire Conroy

(

)

... that while Victoire Conroy was among the few companions allowed to associate with the young Queen Victoria, the queen disliked her?

Reviewed: Henry Knighton
Comment: ALT1: ... that Victoire Conroy was among the few companions allowed to associate with Queen Victoria in her youth?

Created/expanded by Ruby2010 (talk). Self nom at 05:37, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

ALT2 ... that as a result of the controlling Kensington System, the young Queen Victoria was only allowed a few companions, which included Victoire Conroy?

Article is supported by inline citations. It has no images requiring copyright checks. New enough and long enough. Hooked text found in article and supported by sources.
Erk. I think it might have some neutrality issues? "and was taller and prettier," Comparing prettiness is with out "so and so said" feels not entirely neutral. "reported their activities to the hated John Conroy" Hated also feels non-neutral. QPQ also needed.
The sources were not plagiarised to write the article and support the hooked text. --LauraHale (talk) 06:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

If article could be reworded a bit to address neutrality issues (ideally by citing who made subjective claims), that would be good. QPQ also needed. --LauraHale (talk) 06:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for looking it over. I have fixed the neutrality issues, let me know if anything else is needed ~~(will review another hook today).~~ Ruby 2010/2013 19:18, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Willing to give it a tick. Not the best neutrality fix but should do for now. --LauraHale (talk) 19:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)