Jump to content

Talk:Kississing Lake

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kississing Lake Specifications

[edit]

What is the surface area of Kississing Lake? 2603:6000:C20C:1700:D4BA:9CCF:4627:DDD5 (talk) 22:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About 141 square miles (370 km2), according to the book Canadian North. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:01, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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) 19:40, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

5x expanded by P199 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:40, 7 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kississing Lake; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - not in article.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: @P199: Good article but I'm not seeing the hook in the body of the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:26, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onegreatjoke: Thanks for your review. The hook is the 3rd paragraph (right before the geography section). -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 01:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@P199: I see that but the issue is that the statement is in the intro when it has to be in the body of the article somewhere. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Onegreatjoke: That is not a policy requirement, nor stated in the Reviewing Guide. Moreover, the sections are specific to their respective subtopics, and the hook statement, like the sentence of the name meaning, doesn't fit into the Geography and History sections. Regards, -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 00:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I could swear that that's an issue considering so many of my nominations have been held back for that reason but oh well. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:09, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As a note I've pulled the hook out of the queue per this discussion, which should be addressed before re-approval. - Aoidh (talk) 11:52, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found and added a better source, a CBC News article. I propose a new alternative hook:

-- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New review by Larataguera

I do think the new CBC source [1] addresses the concern raised in this discussion, because the source clearly states without attribution or qualification that the lake is "the main resource for the community." However, the source doesn't mention Sherridon. Maybe that's a minor point, but perhaps it's better to rephrase the hook to speak more generally about the community around the lake.

I also have some minor NPOV concerns:

  • Métis people have been left out of the history section. There used to be a Road allowance community on Kississing Lake. Please include that.[2]
  • Mine pollution comprises a major portion of scholarly literature about the lake. The pollution should be given due weight and be mentioned in the lead.[3][4][5]
  • The only mention of pollution should not say that the tailings continue to threaten to pollute the lake when pollution has clearly already occurred (see scholarly papers above).

I think if these concerns are addressed that the article will be fine. (I haven't checked for copyvios yet, but I assume the prior reviewer has done so, and so I don't expect a problem there).

Larataguera (talk) 11:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Larataguera: for your review. I never realized that the CBC article doesn't specifically mention Sherridon (although that is obvious). I will tweak the hook. As for the 3 other bulleted concerns, those don't affect the DYK (but I made a small edit to say that pollution has already happened). I appreciate these concerns, however, and I will use these sources to expand the article in the coming weeks (I don't have time to work on that now). -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:06, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT1a: ... that although threatened by contaminated tailings water, Kississing Lake in Manitoba, Canada, is the main resource for residents around the lake?
    Alt1a is fine. Regarding the bulleted concerns, you're right that there's no requirement for completeness in a DYK nomination, and I'm willing to say that the missing pollution studies are just an incomplete article, so they could be added later without holding up the review (and I hope you will!).
    However, knowingly leaving the Métis people out of the history contributes to WP:BIAS, and hence violates NPOV, which is a requirement for DYK nominations. I would be satisfied with a single sentence stating that there was a Métis road allowance community on the lake that provided a guide to prospectors who found the Sherritt-Gordon mine. (Or something to that effect, based on this source by Lawrence Barkwell). I hope that's not too much trouble. Larataguera (talk) 19:44, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Larataguera: Thanks for your constructive feedback (good source from Barkwell - downloaded it for future use as references in other articles). I have added the info on the Métis community and guides. The info on the pollution will have to follow later in September (no time now). -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 15:48, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your willingness to work with me P199. This article is ready to go! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Larataguera (talk • contribs) 18:30, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kississing_Lake&oldid=1203314195"