Template:Did you know nominations/Martha Wise

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 Carabinieri (talk) 17:17, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Martha Wise

(

)

... that Martha Wise claimed to have murdered three family members with arsenic because she was addicted to funerals and there weren't enough in her town?

Created/expanded by Fluffernutter (talk). Self nom at 19:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: I have fewer than 5 DYK credits and am exempt from the quid-pro-quo rule afaik. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Length and newness are OK. Most of the article has footnotes, but there is no citation to support the "In media" section. That section needs sourcing. I have not yet checked for plagiarism concerns. Hook fact is supported, in general -- but see below. I suggest rewording the hook to get away from the word "claimed", to indicate that she poisoned 17 people, and to change "addicted" to "irresistibly drawn":

ALT1... that Martha Wise said she poisoned seventeen family members with arsenic, killing three, because she was irresistibly drawn to funerals and there weren't enough in her town?

I note that the source does not indicate that she described her condition as "addiction" -- that's putting a modern spin on the subject. My proposed rewording is intended to avoid an anachronism. The source says she said she was "lured irresistibly" to funerals and that "the grief of the mourners satisfied her hunger for suffering"; and the reporter characterized this as a "brutal craving." --Orlady (talk) 22:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Source added for "In Media". Your wording of the hook is fine with me. I was worried about length, but even with your changes it's under 200 characters, so all is well. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 00:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks good now (all article sections sourced; no evidence of plagiarism, close paraphrasing, or copyvio found). Please use ALT1. --Orlady (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)