- 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 97198 (talk) 13:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Slide Hollow
edit- ... that 35 dissolved elements have been detected in the waters of Slide Hollow?
* ALT1:... that 35 dissolved elements, including uranium and all but two of the non-radioactive lanthanides, have been detected in the waters of Slide Hollow?- ALT2. ... that the waters of Slide Hollow contain 35 dissolved elements, including uranium?
Moved to mainspace by Jakec (talk). Self-nominated at 02:09, 6 August 2015 (UTC).
-
Article started on 5 August and nominated for DYK on 6 August, so new enough, and at 4,631 characters long enough. No copyvio detected. No pic, so nothing to worry about there. Well referenced with inline citations from reliable sources. But there are some issues:- At the present the lead reads more like a part of the Geography section than a lead. There is even a ref in it. Do you think you could move that section (or part of it) a bit further down and replace it with a brief sentence instead?
- As for the hook, the original one is slightly bland and the ALT1 is too complicated, most people have no idea what "non-radioactive lanthanides" are so they will not peak their interest. But they do know what uranium is, so could you do a version/ALT2 of ALT1 with just the uranium? I cannot suggest it since I cannot approve an ALT2 I make myself.
- Then there is the ref for the hook. It is a ref with many pages that covers a lot! It is quite hard to find the facts supporting the hook, especially since "Slide Hollow" is written as "SlideHallow" (no space and an "a" instead of an "o") in the tables. Do you think that you could make a note of the different spelling somewhere and also somehow make a distinction that the part of the about the dissolved elements can be found in Appendix D/pages 75–89? To make it easier for readers and the DYK-promoter that will come along after my review.
- Finally, when I check the elements in the tables, I only find 32 above detection limit. The rest are at or under detection limit. (Na, Mg, Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti, Mn, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, As, Br, Rb, Sr, Y, Cd, Ba, La, Ce, Pr, Nb, Sm, Eu, Gd, Dy, Er, Yb, Hf, Pb, U) Which ones did I miss? Or should the ones at detection limit also be included?
- Responding point by point.
- I'll have to disagree with this one. As far as I can tell, nearly every section in the article has some information from it summarized in the lead.
- I guess that interestingness is subjective, but anyway, I'll propose an ALT2. I still think 35 dissolved elements is a lot, but the prep builder can decide.
- I will add a comment explaining where the dissolved elements data is. I don't think "Slide Hallow" is worth mentioning; it's almost certainly either a PDF glitch or a simple typo.
- Yes, the elements at detection limit were also included. --Jakob (talk) aka Jakec 19:15, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
- @Jakec: It was mainly the ref in the lead that I was concerned about. Some editors think that's ok, some do not. I would prefer it not to be there, but if it does not violate any policy I can live with it. Oh, I was a bit unclear there about the ALT. Keeping the 35 elements is fine, it was just the "and all but two of the non-radioactive lanthanides" that I was referring to as complicated. You can tweak the ALT2 if you like. Thank you for the comment about the pages, I don't want to put anyone through that searching again! Sorry for being picky about the number, but it should add up now. BTW, I'm starting to look forward to the article about the Pennsylvania Angler. I've seen that red link around now. ;) w.carter-Talk 19:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
