Template:Did you know nominations/Hager Mountain

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 Miyagawa (talk) 23:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Hager Mountain

(

)

~~... that the fire lookout station (pictured) on Hager Mountain in south-central Oregon can be rented by the public from November through May?~~

Reviewed: Chandos Glass Cone

Created by Orygun (talk). Self nominated at 00:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC).

Everything checks out, and this is good to go Nick-D (talk) 09:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

The hook fails Rule F10: WP:NOTADVERTISING. Yoninah (talk) 16:48, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok, how about if I change hook to highlight the Forest Service use period rather than the period available for public use.

ALT1: ... that the fire lookout station on Hager Mountain (pictured) in south-central Oregon is manned by a United States Forest Service employee from June through October?

Hopefully, this new hook solves the problem.--Orygun (talk) 21:09, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

ALT2: ... that the fire lookout station (pictured) on Hager Mountain in south-central Oregon is occupied half a year by US Forest Service personnel, and half a year by vacationers? Yoninah (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Either ALT is fine with me.--Orygun (talk) 04:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

New reviewer needed to decide between ALT hooks, as well as to do a more comprehensive review indicating what was checked. Yoninah (talk) 09:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

ALT2 seems to be factually incorrect unless there's a reference to support the implied statement that the lookout station is consistently booked throughout the cooler months and winter (which seems unlikely). I don't think that the original hook was in any way advertising... Nick-D (talk) 10:04, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

While I was surprised that anyone would see the original hook as an advertisement, I’d like to get this nomination moving. ALT1 is easy to verify and no one could possibly see it as anything but a simple statement of fact. Why not go with that hook?--Orygun (talk) 01:48, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

It's not very interesting I'm afraid. How about: a fire lookout station has been located on Hager Mountain (current station pictured) since 1915? (if this is correct). The centennial is interesting. Nick-D (talk) 10:33, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

ALT3: ... that a fire lookout station has been located on Hager Mountain (current station pictured) since 1915?

Text for ALT3 is correct. I hadn't thought about the lookout's centennial. I agree, that makes it more interesting than ALT1 or ALT2.--Orygun (talk) 06:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

OK, ALT3 is good to go. I've struck the others to help the DYK clerks do their thing. Nick-D (talk) 07:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@Nick-D: while the hook has been sorted out, your initial review, "Everything checks out", is not enough. You should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been covered. Yoninah (talk) 11:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Yes, that's what checks out. I've reviewed heaps of DYKs over the years and am entirely familiar with the criteria... They're met. Nick-D (talk) 06:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you; restoring tick based on your review. If you've been following the discussions at WT:DYK and T:TDYK at all, you should know that we are asking reviewers to provide more explicit reviews to make everything clear at the start. Yoninah (talk) 10:58, 30 January 2015 (UTC)