Template:Did you know nominations/Electron backscatter diffraction

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 Cielquiparle (talk) 12:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Electron backscatter diffraction

(

)

EBSD map of duplex stainless steel microstructure orientation

... that electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) is used to characterise polycrystalline materials at the micro and nano-scale (example pictured)? Source: https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-0-387-88136-2
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Bismarck Kuyon

5x expanded by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 22:29, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Electron backscatter diffraction; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

@FuzzyMagma: The article before your expansion [1] was 11 kB "readable prose size"; it is now 49 kB "readable prose size". This falls short of 5x expansion unless you have a different count. You could (1) add more text; (2) wait until it passes GA or (3) convince me to waive the rules under WP:IAR. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:47, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

@Hawkeye7: I never understood the 5x criteria but When you look to the page statistics, I have added 83.2% new text which is 0.1% less than the 5x expansion (assuming we mean 5/6 expansion of the article as it) .. if there is other criteria like the article authorship, I am ahead by %86.5, 3.2 ahead of the 5x criteria. All of this and I have never touched this article before this week. cooking all of this offline for months just to land this DYK (also waiting for my thesis and paper to get approved to avoid anyone coming back saying "it was copied from Wikipedia!"). As for WP:IAR, I think I am asking you to be guided by the page statistics (and authorship) rather than just the prose length. It’s not a prose measuring contest .. it’s the text added and text removed or edited FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:52, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay, we will IAR per the conversation at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Electron backscatter diffraction. The criterion is arbitrary (Wikipedia:Did you know/Meanies). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Before it gets picked up at GA, you need to improve the referencing. fn 1 points to a whole book; you need page numbers. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)