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 SL93 (talk) 18:46, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Frank H. Wadsworth

Frank Wadsworth in 2002
Frank Wadsworth in 2002

Created by Jmoliver (talk). Nominated by Evrik (talk) at 19:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The nomination is new enough, long enough, ran Earwig and it's copyright free. I adjusted the article so it's got the inline citation. There's an image, I think it's done correctly. The hook is good. Sources are reliable and there's about 5 to clean up which don't affect the article much. The prose is great. dawnleelynn(talk) 15:38, 18 April 2022 (UTC) y

  • @Jmoliver: I don't know that those sources are needed. Is it possible for you to clean-up some of these sources? --evrik (talk) 20:39, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
  • This nomination has some close paraphrasing that needs cleaning up. In Earwig, it's the first two sources listed. dawnleelynn(talk) 22:56, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
  • I think I got the paraphrasing down to an acceptable level. --evrik (talk) 00:41, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
  • evrik I guess we've both been waiting on the other party. I never heard back on the sources cleanup that I wrote up. You had pinged another on them. Let me know. It's late, I'll look first thing tomorrow to make sure there wasn't anything else. dawnleelynn(talk) 05:10, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  • evrik OK, I signed off. You'll have to handle those 5 or so sources in your own time. Also, does the image look good at 100px? Good luck! dawnleelynn(talk) 15:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Even if the article is fixed so that there are no copyvios with the English sources, we really do need someone to go through the Spanish sources. SL93 (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
I think we can take it back to this version. That should remove most of the problematic content. --evrik (talk) 01:53, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
evrik, whatever is done will need to remove all of the problematic content, not merely most. And nothing has been done after ten days, beyond theleekycauldron's edits made just before the article was pulled. If good progress on the necessary checks and edits hasn't been accomplished in another seven days, perhaps it is time to close this nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

I cited the 1942 claim. I did an earwig check on the quoting. Almost every sentence as a reference. I'm okay with the Spanish to English translations. --evrik (talk) 18:05, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

The issue I raised was not that there are not citations listed, but rather than those citations don't always support the claims being made. Another example: the article claims that he was "the only member of Yokahu Lodge to be awarded" the DSA; the citation provided doesn't mention Yokahu Lodge. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:36, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

- Length, Date, QPQ, and image (PD-US) are good. I also went through the article to check all the English citations (I do not speak Spanish and have not checked those) and, as far as I can see, they checked out. Earwigs also looks good as does a direct comparison against one of the book references (available via Google Books). However, in reworking some language to remove close paraphrasing of the book references it looks like the proposed hook itself is uncomfortably closely paraphrased from here and we will need to rework it/a new hook. Evrik, I'm happy to review a new/modified hook if you have one. Aside from that I think this nomination is close to "getting across the line" as the article has been fairly heavily edited and reviewed since it was pulled. Thanks, Mifter (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

- Thanks, evrik, this ALT hook looks good to me. Best, Mifter Public (talk) 05:12, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm curious how anyone knows that the Spanish language sources match the content and has no copyright violations. SL93 (talk) 08:55, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I know that Evrik is fine with the translations, but they nominated this highly problematic and pulled article as well. SL93 (talk) 15:51, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
This cannot be promoted until the Spanish sources are checked. DYK really has a huge issue if those sources are ignored. SL93 (talk) 15:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I did check them. What what happened the AGF on foreign-language sources? --evrik (talk) 18:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm just being cautious when even the content from the English sources had issues. It's not assuming bad faith either, but it is being extra careful with potential mistakes considering what has happened already and I'm sure the original promoter agfed blindly as well. SL93 (talk) 19:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Pinging the original promoter theleekycauldron for their thoughts. I honestly don't want to be in a bad position at errors or in general. SL93 (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
You're also the nominator. I don't understand why you're reviewing it also. SL93 (talk) 19:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I haven't reviewed it, but have been trying to troubleshoot the nomination. The author kept adding and editing the article after I nominated it, which IMHO is where most of the issues arose. I don't think you'll find that I added a checkmark anywhere on the nomination. --evrik (talk) 21:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
That isn't what I mean, but I will readd the approval. I will not be promoting it though. Someone else can do that if they feel the need to. SL93 (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)