Template:Did you know nominations/Australian Renewable Energy Agency
- 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 Allen3 talk 09:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Australian Renewable Energy Agency
[edit]... that the Australian Renewable Energy Agency is funding the construction of the largest solar power station in the Southern Hemisphere?
Created by Chriswaterguy (talk). Nominated by John Vandenberg (talk) at 17:24, 24 March 2014 (UTC).
- One issue with that hook is that they are not the sole funder. The article needs to give more detail about the funding structure, with sources, in order that the hook doesnt imply a mistruth. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:17, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
John, it's up to you to provide a workable hook as nominator, or to fix the article yourself so the hook you proposed is valid, if you wish this to run as a DYK entry. It's been over three and a half weeks with no action; you need to do something soon if this is going to proceed. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Fixed with ALT1 (and article conforms to this):
- ALT1: ... that the Australian Renewable Energy Agency is helping fund construction of the southern hemisphere's largest solar power station?
Note that while this is specifically a photovoltaic plant, it is the largest solar plant of any kind in the S.H. Thus the facial text of ALT1 is correct but its final link is somewhat overspecific. However, I don't see any better link choice, without overcomplicating the statement of the hook ("construction of a photovoltaic power station which will be the southern hemisphere's largest solar power station" -- yechh). EEng (talk) 23:10, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Now that a valid hook has been supplied, a full review of the nomination is needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:27, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
New, long, spotchecked for copyvio etc., cites fine (also spotchecked). Quotes cited. Minor improvement templates, no disputes. Slightly all-good-news tone but it's a new agency still in the honeymoon period. ALT1 appropriate, directly stated, directly cited. Seat backs and tray tables in upright and locked position, electronic devices off. EEng (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
