- 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 Gatoclass (talk) 13:10, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Arp 147
edit
- ... that the galaxy pair Arp 147 (pictured) contains a ring of nine black holes?
Created by Coinmanj (talk). Self nominated at 05:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC).
-
- Article is new (from Nov 30), 1730B
- Cited inline
- Hook is brief, definitely interesting (9?!), and verified
- Photo in article, PD-Hubble
- Suggestions/issues
- For the sources (3 and 8 particularly) can we get some more publishing details (author, journal, date, etc)?
- Link to Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies? (your discretion)
- Okay, I'm back:
- @Smaller galaxy: The source given doesn't seem to back up the claim, though http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2011/arp147/ does.
- In terms of close paraphrasing, the only problematic phrases look to be "does not appear to be a part of any significant galaxy group" [1] and "The most intense period of star formation ended 15 million years ago" [2]. Any chance that more different wording exists? They are pretty mechanical phrases, and my tired mind can't immediately think of any better wording.
- Chris857 (talk) 04:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I switched out the references. I tend to think rather "clinically" so it's difficult for me to come up with different phrasing, especially since the wording expresses the point exactly. I don't know of any other way to convey "does not appear to be a part of any significant galaxy group" without imparting vagueries and since that's just a single line, by my understanding of policy, there's no real copy vio problem. I could simply remove the word "a" without losing any meaning (?). I've changed the other sentence in question. Coinmanj (talk) 06:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, my concerns are addressed, so this passes. Chris857 (talk) 15:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm back:
