Template:Did you know nominations/Vaccinium oxycoccos
- 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 BlueMoonset (talk) 17:35, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Vaccinium oxycoccos
edit
- ... that, according to an Alaskan report, a tribe of Eskimo cook the swamp cranberry (pictured) with fish-eggs and blubber?
- Reviewed: Prom-asaurus
Created/expanded by IceCreamAntisocial (talk). Nominated by Rcej (talk) at 10:55, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
The hook is supported by a vague reference to Michigan's listing of material on this plant. There should be a page reference to one reliable source, not a vague url. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 23:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- In what way is the source unreliable based on its url? :) Rcej (Robert) – talk 08:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- The hook needs an inline citation, usually with a definite page-reference. A U-Michigan (Go Blue!) url listing a bunch of books is not such an inline citation. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- Fixed it! Thx for review ;) Rcej (Robert) – talk 10:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- The good news is that you improved it. The bad news is that the in-line citation needs further improvement. The citation is to a strange publication, which need not be a reliable source. A definite problem is that you cite the source without having examined it, using the Michigan website. The Michigan source, being the source consulted and being accessible, needs to be cited for this fact. You should of course continue to acknowledge the source it cites, and try to find a copy. (It is plausible that Eskimos eat berries and blubber, of course. I don't doubt the claim.)
- The other problem is compliance with standard written English. "Eskimo eat" reads like a singular/plural error. Also, does the source say Eskimo, or does it state a specific tribe. Have you checked WP's article on each, to know which is the correct word? (Writing about indigenous populations often has headaches: For example, "Lapp" has been replaced by "Sami" in Sweden. Please check that your choice of tribe/Eskimo is best.) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:53, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- How's the grammar now? And are you nullifying good faith acceptance of the print source for this hook? Rcej (Robert) – talk 06:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Rcej!
- Please read the MOS regarding citations. You cannot cite a source that you have not read as being the source for the hook.
- You need to give first the reference you used, which is the (crude et le cuit?) Michigan on-line bibliography. Then you cite the source given in the Michigan bibliography, and indicate that it was cited in the Michigan bibliography; a non-standard but honest approach would be to insert
- "|id=Cited by {{harvtxt|Michigan|year|loc=unpaginated webpage}}|"
- in the citation-template. (Perhaps an orthodox approach can be more elegant.)
- Please read WP:RS and WP:AGF, and avoid misusing WP policy terminology.
- Kiefer.Wolfowitz 08:45, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Kiefer is right in that we should be citing the web reference if we can't access the original. I formatted it a bit. I am happy to take it as reliable given the Ethnobotany department of a university is cataloguing it..I suppose to be safer, the article could read "A tribe of Eskimo have been reported eating the cranberry cooked with fish eggs and blubber." to maybe indicate we're not 100% sure of the veracity but could go either way on this.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Casliber,
- I further formatted the citation in the article.
- I agree with Casliber's suggestion: If you implement it, then another editor can approve the hook. (On the other hand, any editor is free to object to the hook, since the sourcing is borderline, although I would suggest that such an objection be phrased as politely as possible.) Good luck! Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:40, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Kiefer is right in that we should be citing the web reference if we can't access the original. I formatted it a bit. I am happy to take it as reliable given the Ethnobotany department of a university is cataloguing it..I suppose to be safer, the article could read "A tribe of Eskimo have been reported eating the cranberry cooked with fish eggs and blubber." to maybe indicate we're not 100% sure of the veracity but could go either way on this.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:41, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- How's the grammar now? And are you nullifying good faith acceptance of the print source for this hook? Rcej (Robert) – talk 06:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- Fixed it! Thx for review ;) Rcej (Robert) – talk 10:00, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- In what way is the source unreliable based on its url? :) Rcej (Robert) – talk 08:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Thx Kiefer and Casliber :) I ce'd the hook to reflect, so whomever gives the greeny may. Rcej (Robert) – talk 06:46, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- You did not implement Casliber's suggestion, so I copy-edited the hook.
- Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:46, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
