Template:Did you know nominations/Greenhouse gas emissions by Turkey

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 Yoninah (talk) 08:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Greenhouse gas emissions by Turkey

(

)

... that coal, cars, cows, and construction emitted half Turkey's greenhouse gases in 2018? Source: Coal total = 150 Mt CO2 Turkish Greenhouse Gas Inventory report page 57. Following figures from Turkish Greenhouse Gas Inventory 2018 common reporting format table TUR_2020_2018_13042020_112534.xlsx: Cows enteric fermentation 1034 kt CH4, manure management 143 kt CH4 and 6.08 kt N2O, totals 42 Mt Co2eq. Construction (cement only) 37 Mt CO2. Road transport (cars not split out but must be at least half) 77 Mt CO2.

Comment: Routine calculation (multiplication by emission factor and addition) is not original research and I can write the arithmetic in more detail if necessary.

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Phyllodoce lineata (not much on the review page as it was my first one - but I made a few fixes to the article itself)

Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC).

Hi Chidgk1, here is my review. No problems with eligibility - new GA & plenty of prose characters. QPQ has been provided even though not required yet - thanks! As the article has just undergone a GA review it will go without saying that its content is all within policy. (I do note that the sentence "will be spread across large parts of the population; while the losses will be concentrated on specific groups, making them more visible and politically disruptive" appears to be verbatim from the cited source, but introduced as the opinion of Kemal Derviş. Best stick it in a quote.)

Added quotation marks - thanks for spotting that

So the only thing left is the hook, and I think I have a sticking point here (not to do with OR). It is simply that surely the facts in the hook are not particularly unique - won't coal, cars, cows and construction be in the top few for almost every country? I am not saying it's objectively uninteresting, but that something more interesting could probably be found in the article. Some things that stood out to me included coal-fired power stations in Turkey being depicted as increasing employment rather than causing climate change, or only 100 electric buses being in use in Turkey (2018) despite having native manufacturers which choose to export. Maybe you could come up with something else. Rcsprinter123 (articulate) 20:48, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Interesting point - I had not thought about that - I am hoping this article might motivate someone to improve Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States so I would prefer to keep this as the hook if there is a chance it might inspire someone to come up with a snappy point about USA emissions (which would have to include natural gas as might this article in future). Even if both the USA and Turkey are outside the Paris Agreement by the end of this year, they will both still continue reporting annually as UNFCCC "Annex 1" countries. So the annual spreadsheets with all the figures in will still be the same common reporting format and I am hoping some keen American might do a bit of adding up. Still I will ponder and maybe come up with some alternatives. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that greenhouse gas emissions by Turkey might be reduced by TOGG? Source: "The use of electric vehicles will also bring environmental benefits, according to Hakman. An increase in the number of these vehicles will reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, he said." ([1])
ALT2: ~~... that Greta Thunberg and 15 other children have made an official complaint about greenhouse gas emissions by Turkey?~~

Thanks for responding. Playing a tentative political game with a DYK hook is an interesting thing to do. I don't know whether someone will do it for America, and I don't know whether your alt hooks do it for me. Can you point out, for ALT1, where TOGG is mentioned in the article? And would that hook make any sense to a reader? ALT2 strikes me as a tiny bit misleading as Turkey was one of five countries "complained"/petitioned about. Possibly adjusting to something like

ALT3 "... that in 2019, Greta Thunberg and 14 other children [I counted 15 names total on the earthjustice source] made an official compaint about the greenhouse gas emissions of five countries including Turkey?"

would be an improvement, but I'm not ready to give a green tick yet. Rcsprinter123 (address) 12:54, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

TOGG is indirectly linked at the moment via a national electric car. The idea is that the reader will be interested because they wonder what TOGG means. I think ALT3 is a tad too long.

ALT4: ~~... that increasing greenhouse gas emissions by Turkey is funded by China?~~
ALT5: ~~... that new geothermal power in Turkey risks increasing its greenhouse gas emissions? Source: "Typical emission factors at power plant commissioning range from 1,000 to 1,300 g/kWh."([2])~~

Chidgk1 (talk) 14:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm happy with ALT5, it might be the best we're gonna get. Rcsprinter123 (gas) 20:21, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

If there is nothing better we could go with ALT5, but on reflection it is a bit vague and a little unfair (as the geothermal is better than coal after a few years} so I would like te explore more alternatives first if you have time. I feel ALT4 packs more punch than ALT5.

ALT6: ~~... that Turkey's 2030 greenhouse gas target is twice its emissions.~~

Chidgk1 (talk) 09:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

OK. I've got to say I don't understand the 2030 target. It seems to be about reduction and also increasing greenhouse gas emissions? The ALT6 hook would definitely imply Turkey's emissions want to be doubled, even if that's not what a "greenhouse gas target" means. I think it's just too confusing. Yesterday, I dismissed ALT4 because, while punchy, it does seem unspecific and like it's hinting that China is a force for bad here. Further, it's not mentioned in such terms in the article (a DYK criterion) and the grammar seems a bit off. So for the moment, green tick remains only with ALT5. Rcsprinter123 (banter) 13:55, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Now that I have explicitly linked the article to TOGG and sourced would ALT1 be possible? Chidgk1 (talk) 13:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Fine,

G2G for ALT1 too. Rcsprinter123 (message) 15:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Great - ALT1 it is then. Should I now strike out the others? Chidgk1 (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that would be a good idea, for clarity. Rcsprinter123 (gas) 12:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I came by to promote ALT1, but I think readers are going to skip the bolded link and click on TOGG to find out what it is. In the article, you are piping it to "national electric car", which I think would work better here too:
ALT1a: ... that greenhouse gas emissions by Turkey might be reduced by the introduction of a national electric car? Yoninah (talk) 20:00, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

OK fineChidgk1 (talk) 06:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Restoring tick per Rcsprinter123's review. Yoninah (talk) 08:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)