Template:Did you know nominations/Energy in Turkey
- 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 The C of E (talk) 06:56, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Energy in Turkey
- ... that the 2019 to 2023 strategic plan for energy in Turkey was published in 2020? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT1:... that the 2019 strategic plan for energy in Turkey was published in 2020? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT2:... that lots of energy in Turkey is under the Black Sea? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT3:... that lots of energy in Turkey is underground and under the Black Sea? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT4:... that much energy in Turkey is underground and under the Black Sea? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT5:... that a lot of energy in Turkey is underground and under the Black Sea? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT6:... that plenty of energy in Turkey is underground and under the Black Sea? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT7:... that energy in Turkey underground and under the Black Sea contains greenhouse gases? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT8:... that a large amount of energy in Turkey is underground and under the Black Sea? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC).
Article does meet DYK requirements as a new GA, I didn't find any close paraphrasing, and a QPQ has been done. The hook however isn't very interesting and doesn't really say much about the article subject itself. Could alternative proposals be provided here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:22, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Is it not interesting that the plan was published a year after the period started? Maybe that is common where you live too? In UK a (non secret) government plan would be published beforehand so the public could comment. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- It's not about commonality, it's just not a hook that would catch attention. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Is it not interesting that the plan was published a year after the period started? Maybe that is common where you live too? In UK a (non secret) government plan would be published beforehand so the public could comment. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:38, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- OK I made it a bit more obvious Chidgk1 (talk) 12:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- I don't know, I really don't think this direction is working out. Could you try proposing a different hook fact? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:01, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- OK I made it a bit more obvious Chidgk1 (talk) 12:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
If you like ALT2 I will add cite.Chidgk1 (talk) 10:45, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think there's potential in ALT2's hook fact, but its current wording could probably still be improved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:42, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
- As for ALT2 itself, it's not really explicitly stated in the article: the article states that a gas field was found under the Black Sea, and also states that it could fuel most of Turkey's residential energy needs this decade. Perhaps a hook based on that could also work? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
- Once you are happy with the hook wording (suggest wording if you have ideas) I will make sure it is in article and cited properly before you tick it off. How about ALT3? Chidgk1 (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
- Perhaps change "lots of" to something else? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
- Have added ideas - do you have an idea? Chidgk1 (talk) 06:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
- "Plenty"/"Lots of" don't really sound encyclopedic, which was the thought I had. Perhaps something like "Significant energy resources..." or wording to that effect? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:08, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
- I thought the DYK could be more playful than an article in order to be more catchy?. If you want something encyclopedic why not go with the original hook? That is encyclopedic and boring unless the reader takes a second look, after which it also sounds outrageous (well to me having come from UK anyway and presumably in USA plans are published before they start). This is our dry Brit style. Anyway I added ALT7 for your consideration. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:12, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think some variation of ALT6 is our best option here, there just have to be a more encyclopedic wording than "a lot" or "plenty". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
- Not quite sure what you mean by "more encyclopedic wording" - if ALT4 is not a more encyclopedic wording please suggest a complete hook. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:15, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
- Does "a large amount" work? Pamzeis (talk) 08:42, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks - ALT8 fine by me Narutolovehinata5? Chidgk1 (talk) 14:58, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
- Does "a large amount" work? Pamzeis (talk) 08:42, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
- Not quite sure what you mean by "more encyclopedic wording" - if ALT4 is not a more encyclopedic wording please suggest a complete hook. Chidgk1 (talk) 15:15, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think some variation of ALT6 is our best option here, there just have to be a more encyclopedic wording than "a lot" or "plenty". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
- I thought the DYK could be more playful than an article in order to be more catchy?. If you want something encyclopedic why not go with the original hook? That is encyclopedic and boring unless the reader takes a second look, after which it also sounds outrageous (well to me having come from UK anyway and presumably in USA plans are published before they start). This is our dry Brit style. Anyway I added ALT7 for your consideration. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:12, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
- Perhaps change "lots of" to something else? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:26, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
- Once you are happy with the hook wording (suggest wording if you have ideas) I will make sure it is in article and cited properly before you tick it off. How about ALT3? Chidgk1 (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Apologies for the late reply, I took some time off from the nomination to think which of the options were the best and how to move forward. I'm not a total fan of ALT8 but it's probably the best option so far and any further changes could result in the hook's hookiness being diluted, so I'll be giving it my approval. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:13, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
