Template:Did you know nominations/Tony Swatton

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Tony Swatton

edit

Created by Tregaurd (talk), The C of E (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 21:20, 15 November 2013 (UTC).

  • There's still close paraphrasing here (and relying only on DupDet isn't the best idea): compare for example "the knife was brittle and it would shatter since it wasn’t the right metal and didn't have the right process on it" with "the file was brittle and it would shatter, that it wasn’t the right metal or the right process on it:". Nikkimaria (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Okay, but that was only an example; you need to look at all of the content for rewording. Just on a quick look I see another instance in "he uses two forges, to make blades out of metals ranging from low-carbon steel to Damascus steel" vs "he uses two forges...to make blades out of materials ranging from low-carbon steel to Damascus steel". Nikkimaria (talk) 16:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Further example: "He is a fan of fantasy and sci-fi novels. Swatton had often visualized weapons and armour" vs "As a young fan of fantasy and science fiction books... Swatton had often visualized the armor and weaponry". Nikkimaria (talk) 15:33, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Woah woah woah, just one line that I missed that can be sorted and suddenly it's ineligible? I'm fairly sure that this is not necessary. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:38, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Better now that you've rewritten it. I would suggest further reworking the second paragraph of History, as the last three sentences are structurally quite similar to the source. Also, there are still some instances where we've gone too far in the other direction to material not being supported by sources - for example, you say that "The two continued to trade between 1994 and 1998", but in the source the trading and the period in which Samson worked for him are independent of each other. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:18, 21 November 2013 (UTC)