Template:Did you know nominations/Fulmar (1868)
The following is an archived discussion of Fulmar (1868)'s DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know
(talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.
The result was: promoted by BlueMoonset (talk) 17:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC).
Fulmar (1868)
[edit]... that the Fulmar is one of four vessels that have sunk off the coast of Kilkee, Co. Clare with loss of life?
Created by ShaneMc2010 (talk). Self nom at 14:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
-
- Article is new enough as created on 10 February; long enough at 2553 characters of readable prose; neutral; no copy vios detected using earwig; each paragraph has in line citations; I have added a WikiProjects Shipwrecks & Ireland templates to the talk page and assessed it as 'start' class.
- Hook is well under criteria for number of characters; catchy; and correctly formatted.
-
I can't find anything in any of the references indicating the Fulmar was "one of four.....with loss of life" - am I missing it from somewhere? Also, looking at the nominators talk page, there seem to be five credits already for DYK, so QPQ needed? SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:01, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry I fixed that reference there, I hadn't sorted the search. It now only lists vessels that were lost around Clare between 1836 and 1895. Although it shows 6 ships sunk around Kilkee, The Ranger and The Guiding Star lost no men. ShaneMc2010 14:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, Shane, thanks for looking at that so promptly. I realise a certain amount of license is given for basic arithmetic in arriving at the hook, but I'm still not sure if going to the reference, working out there are six wrecks from Kilkee and then checking all six to find four resulted in a loss of life isn't stretching it a bit far.....I've left a note on Bluemoonset's talk page to ask for clarification (I'm afraid I'm a bit inept at review nuances) but maybe someone else with experience will, in the meantime, pass by to help confirm whether it's acceptable or not, so I can give a tick. It is an interesting article. What about the QPQ as you seem to have five DYK credits on your talk page? Again, please accept my apologies if I've mis-interpreted this. SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:55, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry I fixed that reference there, I hadn't sorted the search. It now only lists vessels that were lost around Clare between 1836 and 1895. Although it shows 6 ships sunk around Kilkee, The Ranger and The Guiding Star lost no men. ShaneMc2010 14:49, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes I even thought so myself that placing that reference was stretching it but it is the only one I can find. I could place four different references after the hook, but in my opinion that would look quite messy. Another thing I myself is not that sure about is my conversion from £6000 to £300,000 concerning the repair of the ship. Although I did use the official currency converter from the national archives, it stopped updating itself after 2005 so it actually came to £289,860. I said 300,000 to make up for the 8 years from 2005 to 2013 but that probably wont do either! Sorry about the DYK credits, I literally only know how to nominate articles I make, I dont have a clue about the rules of Did You Know. I suppose it was ignorance on my behalf as they worked before now. ShaneMc2010 16:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- The thing about a DYK hook is that it is considered an "extraordinary claim", which is why we say that the statement from the article has to be inline cited immediately after the sentence involved. In this case, the citation is simply to a site that lists shipwrecks, but has no information as to whether they were fatal. The loss of life also needs citing.
- My advice, actually, would be to go with a different hook that doesn't require that you need to substantiate the "one of four vessels" phrase, since that requires, absent a reliable source that directly says this, that you find citations for each of the six Kildee vessels that confirm the four that had loss of life and the two that did not (establishing that there were six and the fate of all of them). I think the fifty-years-to-the-day after Intrinsic might make an even better hook, and you can add in the loss of life for the two of them (sourced, of course, for Intrinsic, since Fulmar is sourced already). A reference is needed that gives the date the Intrinsic sank regardless.
- For reviewing, since you have reached the point where you need to review one DYK nomination for each article you submit, the rules for nominations (and hence the review criteria) are at WP:DYK and at WP:DYKSG (the latter has important details that the former misses). There's also a reviewing guide at WP:DYKR. (It's a lot to take in; I remember I felt a bit overwhelmed my first time reviewing, but it gets easier.) If you have any questions when you do your review, please feel free to ask. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your clarification, BlueMoonset. I've tried to come up with a new hook about the 50 year gap but can't really find a source to easily cover it. My only other suggestion for an alternative hook to consider would be:
- ALT1 ... that after the Fulmar sank off the coast of Kilkee, Co. Clare in 1886 with 17 crew aboard, only the Captain's body was found?
- Very boring, I know......Could you also do a QPQ review as well, please, Shane? SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:30, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your clarification, BlueMoonset. I've tried to come up with a new hook about the 50 year gap but can't really find a source to easily cover it. My only other suggestion for an alternative hook to consider would be:
- For reviewing, since you have reached the point where you need to review one DYK nomination for each article you submit, the rules for nominations (and hence the review criteria) are at WP:DYK and at WP:DYKSG (the latter has important details that the former misses). There's also a reviewing guide at WP:DYKR. (It's a lot to take in; I remember I felt a bit overwhelmed my first time reviewing, but it gets easier.) If you have any questions when you do your review, please feel free to ask. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes I think at this stage the one of four vessels hook should be gotten rid of. I like the sound of:
- Ill get to that review as soon as possible so! ShaneMc2010 18:10, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Comment - I do like the ALT2 hook, which is still correct length etc, but it still gives the problem of needing a further ref to the list of shipwrecks on the website, then arithmetic needed. I've tried to get the list to show details of both on the same page but haven't managed (maybe you can play with it a bit more, Shane?) SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Reviewed: St. Ouen F.C. Although it probably wouldn't look that great, would it be so bad to put two references after the hook? For example a citation to both The Intrinsic and The Fulmars shipwreck page on Irishshipwrecks.com? ShaneMc2010 13:44, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Refs now beside text to support ALT2 hook, I feel the basic arithmetic to work out 50 years from the wreck dates is simple enough.
- QPQ now done.
using ALT2 hook: ... that the Fulmar sank off the coast of Kilkee, Co. Clare, exactly 50 years to the day after the Intrinsic did?
SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:06, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Made minor corrections to both versions ALT2—sources (and articles) give the name of the ship as Intrinsic, not The Intrinsic, changed "that" to "after", and added a comma after "Co. Clare" per MOS—for the sake of whoever promotes this, but that doesn't affect its approval. Glad everything's all set. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:20, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you, BlueMoonset - it was my error! SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:29, 13 February 2013 (UTC)