Talk:Obonga–Ottertooth Provincial Park

Latest comment: 5 months ago by AirshipJungleman29 in topic Did you know nomination

Did you know nomination

edit
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.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 17:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Created by P199 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 36 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

P 1 9 9   19:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC). General eligibility:Reply

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited:  
  • Interesting:  
QPQ: Done.

Overall:   --evrik (talk) 17:55, 8 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

  • What if we change the sentence to this, "The canoe route through the Ottertooth Creek canyon [has been described as] especially difficult and seldom travelled, but rewarding for its "unusual and spectacular scenery of rapids, waterfalls, talus boulders and steep canyons."? There are few independent sources. --evrik (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • This park is notable. I also think the hook is fine as written with the current sourcing. I'm struggling to find a solution that makes you happy. --evrik (talk) 17:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Agree with Evrik. There are tons of sources, just not scholarly/academic ones (obviously, I don't want to use blogs and travel accounts). But an official government-issued work (i.e. Reference #3) should be more than acceptable. Furthermore note that this is not a marketing brochure or some other promotional material. So, if they say that the route "presents the canoeist with severe travel obstacles and minimal campsites" and "one is rewarded with unusual and spectacular scenery...", then that is rather factual and authoritative. It should not cause such trepidation... -- P 1 9 9   17:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • @AirshipJungleman29: The more I think about it, your hesitation to use ALT1 (or original hook for that matter) is unwarranted. The source is not a trivial travel blog or promo piece, but an authoritative government document, which clearly is a WP:RS. Therefore ALT1 should be more than acceptable. If you still don't think so, we should seek a 4th opinion. FWIW, DYK regularly has POV quotes in the hook. -- P 1 9 9   17:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I too would question the dueness of the park's manager singing its praises.--Launchballer 21:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Launchballer, this is a reputable government source describing an aspect of the park. @P199: It may be easier to just write a new hook. I'd offer one, but then I can't approve it.--evrik (talk) 22:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Evrik: two new suggestions:

-- P 1 9 9   15:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps it's the fact that I'm English, but I've never heard of any of the places listed, and my gut reaction to ALT2 is 'and?'. ALT3 still feels a bit advertisingy.--Launchballer 10:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
That is a real stretch! There is nothing promotional about ALT3! In fact, it is so bland, it's boring. What's more, a hook needs to be somewhat promotional anyway to draw people to the article... -- P 1 9 9   13:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
It also needs an end-of-sentence citation. For me, the only thing remotely interesting in this is:
although that is for very large values of 'remotely'.--Launchballer 23:55, 21 May 2024 (UTC)Reply