Template:Did you know nominations/Ellie Morrison

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 97198 (talk) 13:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Ellie Morrison

Ellie Morrison in 2019
Ellie Morrison in 2019
  • ... that Ellie Morrison is the first woman to serve as the national commissioner of the Boy Scouts of America in the organization's 109 year history? Wendell, Bryan (2018-05-31). "Meet the two new volunteers on the BSA's National Key 3". Bryan on Scouting.</ref>

Created by Evrik (talk). Self-nominated at 04:45, 26 October 2019 (UTC).

Solid article on good sources, no copyvio obvious. Hook is fine. - I think the article has too many section headers for it's length. Think about combining, or expanding the article ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:38, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Please say something more hooky other than that she's the "first woman". You could start: "... that Ellie Morrison, the first woman national commissioner of the Boy Scouts of America, did this ..." Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
  • What about:
I don't see much else in the article that could really be in a hook ... RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:57, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • The article doesn't appear to reference the organization's "109 year history" anywhere. Gatoclass (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • (ec) Thank you, RebeccaGreen. But the article doesn't mention a 109-year history, and the third paragraph under "Boy Scouts of America" lacks a cite per Rule D2. Yoninah (talk) 13:35, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • OK, I missed that, sorry! So we could leave out the 109-year history. I'll do a quick check for the uncited para, though that may need to go back to Evrik. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:38, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I've added references to the unreferenced para. Tweaking ALT1:
RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:06, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Please find someone else. To me, first in 109 years of male only history is much more interesting than badge design. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:13, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
I know there is some resistance to the frequent promotion of hooks highlighting women "firsts", but in this case I agree with Gerda that the original hook is much more interesting as well as having a nice quirky feel to it. Gatoclass (talk) 15:39, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • So we're still waiting for the 109-year fact to be added to the article. Yoninah (talk) 17:06, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Evrik, Gerda Arendt, Yoninah, and Gatoclass: I have now edited the article so the lead reads "Eleanor "Ellie" Smith Morrison (born September 6, 1947, in Waco, Texas) was elected the 11th national commissioner of the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) in 2018. She is the first woman to serve in the role since its founding in 1910." I have found a reference which includes the date the Boy Scouts of America were founded, and that she is the first woman national commissioner. I realise that this is not exactly the same as saying "first in 109 years", but that seems less appropriate in an encyclopedia article to me - someone else may want to tweak the wording of the article. Also, she was elected in 2018, so it was actually 108 years.
I agree that the Wood Badge is less interesting, though it's actually a leadership course, not just the badge itself. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:45, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @RebeccaGreen: based on the sources, I think the hook should say:
  • ALT0a: ... that Ellie Morrison is the first woman to serve as the national commissioner of the Boy Scouts of America since its incorporation in 1910?
  • But are we doing SYNTH by citing two different refs, one for "first woman" and one for the organization's founding? Isn't there one source covering both? Yoninah (talk) 12:40, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, the second source contains both facts. The first doesn't give the date the scouts were founded (but it's a scouting source, it would be assumed knowledge). We could take out the first source if it's confusing (or rather, move the full reference down to the next citation of that source). I don't like to put the first of those sources at the end of the sentence, because it doesn't contain the founding date. RebeccaGreen (talk) 12:53, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @RebeccaGreen: yes, take out the first source and move it somewhere else. Then we're ready to go. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 13:12, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
yes, thanks for your effort! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:23, 30 October 2019 (UTC)