A fact from Molly Clutton-Brock appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 March 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that Molly Clutton-Brock treated the spines of African babies until she was deported by the government of Rhodesia?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
Molly Clutton-Brock is within the scope of WikiProject Zimbabwe, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe and Zimbabwe-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.ZimbabweWikipedia:WikiProject ZimbabweTemplate:WikiProject ZimbabweZimbabwe
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
Molly Clutton-Brock is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire
This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion
This article was created or improved during the #1day1woman initiative hosted by the Women in Red project in 2021. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in RedWikipedia:WikiProject Women in RedTemplate:WikiProject Women in RedWomen in Red
...should be Molly Clutton-Brock (as cited in the article itself and in the linked authority records); a redirect is likely needed (I'm not good at creating those). I have used the existing title in the listas --FeanorStar7 (talk) 10:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
@Victuallers: hi, sorry to be a downer but I've removed this from Queue 1 for the time being as I think the image (and the one it's cropped from) may not actually be public domain. They are tagged with a {{PD-Zimbabwe}} template, and marked as "author unknown", but in fact the same image is found in The Times and is attributed to a Sally Roschnik. If the author is not unknown, the template suggests we need to wait until 70 years after the death of the photographer. I have no idea if Ms Roschnik is dead or not, but since it hasn't even been 70 years since the image's creation, I don't think this criterion can be met. Also, as an aside, the template says at the bottom "A Zimbabwean work that is in the public domain in Zimbabwe according to this rule is in the public domain in the U.S. only if it was in the public domain in Zimbabwe in 1996". That also doesn't seem to be met, so wondering if this woule be eligible for Commons anyway, if it isn't in the US public domain? I'll raise a deletion request at Commons shortly, unless there's something I'm missing. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 09:43, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Victuallers: as we discussed on Commons, it seems I was wrong about the anonymous vs credited issue, but if the wording of the template is correct, there's still the US copyright issue. We're fairly sure this image was taken after 1946, so probably not valid under that. I've seen that you've now uploaded it locally on en-wiki as a fair use image, which seems fine, but fair use images aren't allowed to be used on the main page so I think we may still have to run this hook without the image. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I seem to have messed this one up once already! — Amakuru (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
She was thrown out of Rhodesia ~50 years ago so its a fair assumption that the photo is >50 years old. So it is free to use in Zimbabwe. I don't understand the 1996 caveat, but if you do, then it will have to run without an image - which is a pity. She didn't get to Africa until after 1946. Don't worry about mistakes, its amazing that en:wiki emerges despite being created by semi-co-operating humans. Victuallers (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]