Talk:Jane Lunnon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DYK nomination[edit]

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 TJMSmith (talk) 00:28, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 12:47, 31 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • Long enough, nominated in time, QPQ done. Appears neutral/stable. Generally adequate inline sources, which appear reliable enough (but see below caveats/queries). Earwig found no copyright problems and spotchecks on freely available sources revealed no close paraphrasing. Hooks are concise, not negative and check out with sources. Alt 1 is fine.
  • I find the main hook a little dull, having not previously heard of Alleyn's School (and I'm a Brit, it's probably less known internationally); this needs more context to be usable, I think.
  • I like Alt 2 but the quotation given is slightly inaccurate, I think what she actually says is: "is not really doing anything very much for feminism". What you've put in the article is technically correct (C4 misquotes her) but the hook is not. I also think it needs the context of her being a head teacher adding. It would also be useful to add more about this interview clip to the article; she talks extensively about the show's emphasis on appearance, particularly sexualised appearance.
  • Not seeing a source for the place & year of birth?
  • Does Lunnon publish her middle name, maiden name and marriage date? If not, I think these should probably be removed per BLP policy if they are only sourced to the marriage certificate. Neither she nor her husband are public figures and the marriage certificate is not a published source.
  • kesw.org & rolemodels.me ref details could do with expansion. Channel 4 interview needs the date. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:37, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Espresso Addict. I think you are right, I am adding more context to the main hook, and I have corrected and expanded Alt2 as suggested. On the middle name, the answer is yes, Lunnon has included it in several public documents. I wasn’t aware of the BLP policy, which strikes me as very unhelpful to the purpose of an encyclopaedia. I doubt if any other reference works are so particular. In England and Wales Registration of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, is a public process, and while the original documents are primary sources, the indexes to them are publicly available secondary sources and in no sense private or confidential. So I would be inclined to leave those dates (but not to complain if someone comes along and removes them). The source for the place and year of birth is in the next citation. I’ll get around to expanding the article on the lines you have put forward. Moonraker (talk) 05:45, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EA hasn't been active in several days so a new reviewer may be needed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:59, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The issues given above are fixed except for the full name being in the article, but I honestly don't see that as being an issue. I assume good faith on two of the references. This is ready to go. The promoter can choose the hook. SL93 (talk) 00:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]