- 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: rejected by Allen3 talk 14:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues
Created by Paul W (talk). Nominated by Pigsonthewing (talk) at 12:26, 25 July 2013 (UTC).
- New enough. Long enough. Well cited. It was actually created on July 20th but incorrectly posted under June 20th. Please move this under the correct date. Hybernator (talk) 02:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Done.--FoxyOrange (talk) 14:11, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
- Pulling from prep area because it's not long enough. With 1481 prose characters, it's close to the minimum. It should be easy to expand: I see that the infobox has some information that's not presented in prose form, and it would easily be longer if the the article were written less in the cryptic format of a "Who's Who" entry and more in standard English prose. More importantly, after reading this article I found myself knowing almost nothing about what she did professionally that led to all those awards -- and I know that some of that information is available because I found it in online sources. --Orlady (talk) 14:49, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
- After a little explanation of one of the terms and some other minor copy edits, the article is long enough now (1589 characters / 260 words). I agree with Orlady that it still reads like a resume. - tucoxn\talk 03:04, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
- I am very concerned with the level of close paraphrasing in this article. The additions on August 9 by Yogesh Khandke included two long sentences duplicated from FN3 which I have just removed (I haven't checked the rest of Yogesh's edits from that day); previous use of this source by Paul W in the original article text involves close paraphrasing: "Venables in her capacity as chief executive of ADA is a representative of organisations related to water level management and flood risk management, such as Internal Drainage Boards, flood defence committees, environmental agencies, local authorities and various different associate members.", versus the source's "Jean Venables, as Chief Executive of ADA, represents organisations involved with water level management and flood risk management, including Internal Drainage Boards, Flood Defence Committees, Environment Agency, Local Authorities and a wide range of Associate Members." BlueMoonset (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- It has been a week since BlueMoonset's list of issues was posted and there is no evidence of any efforts to resolve them. --Allen3 talk 11:53, 25 August 2013 (UTC)