Template:Did you know nominations/Hertford County Public Schools

The following is an archived discussion of Hertford County Public Schools's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by BlueMoonset (talk) 04:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC).

Hertford County Public Schools

(

)

... that faced with high teacher turnover rates, Hertford County Public Schools helped build teacher housing?

Reviewed: John Hamilton (American Revolution)

Created by JoannaSerah (talk). Self nom at 19:29, 14 February 2013 (UTC).

The article has 1342 words, and was started on 14 February 2013, so length and date are fine. The statement about five member board of education in the lead paragraph is not directly cited in the article below. I suggest changing DYK hook to read "that faced with high teacher turnover rates, Hertford County Public Schools helped build teacher housing?" The word "actually" doesn't seem to fit. The article does contain appropriate citations and none of them are "bare." The hook fact is stated in the article and followed by citation to reliable source. There are no images. In general a nice article with only a couple of minor changes would be good to go.Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I took out "actually" from the hook. Not sure about changing the "five-member" part, because, while there is not a cite that specifically states there are five members only, the cites provided that list the members do only show five. Will check to see if there is anything that specifically mentions "five-member board". -- JoannaSerah (talk) 03:17, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Found a cite that covers the five-member board statement more directly. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 04:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Needs to be checked again to see whether it's ready for approval. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I checked through it again tonight, and made sure that the hook statements were directly cited immediately after use (at end of sentence). I added one citation and rewrote one sentence for flow only. I didn't change any meanings. I do not know if I can now say "Yes, this article is good to go because of these relatively minor edits," but if it is ok to still vote "Yes," then I would. Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Ellin, the edits you made were minor in the extreme, and do not disqualify you in any way for completing your review. Please feel free to conclude it and give it the appropriate icon. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:09, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

This article passes the DYK process and is good to go to the mainspace. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)