Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Head Harbour Lighthouse

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 PrimalMustelid talk 02:26, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Head Harbour Lighthouse

(
)
East Quoddy Head Light, a.k.a. Head Harbour Lighthouse
East Quoddy Head Light, a.k.a. Head Harbour Lighthouse
  • ... that there's an East Quoddy Head Lighthouse (pictured) and a West Quoddy Head Lighthouse across the bay from one another (in matching colors!) but that one is in Canada and the other is in the United States? Source: https://www.lighthousefriends.com/light.asp?ID=1022
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: East Quoddy and West Quoddy are an adorable pair of lighthouses in the Bay of Fundy between Maine, USA and New Brunswick, Canada. They're both painted a bright red and white, (with America's in patriotic stripes and Canada's with a classic St. George's Cross,) and are just a delightful twin site. I noticed there wasn't an article for East Quoddy (a.k.a. Head Harbour Light), so I wrote one up and am submitting this now, hopefully you like it!

Created by Garnet Moss (talk). Self-nominated at 03:32, 4 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Head Harbour Lighthouse; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

  • I'm not sure this qualifies as a reliable source, it appears to be the self-published work of an amateur. nableezy - 16:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
  • It's a thorough, secondary source for information about many lighthouses, which further cites primary sources. I'm happy to submit other links to more authoritative sources, but I chose this one because it included info about both East and West Quoddy in the same body of text, so it seemed most relevant. (Also, sorry if this is bad protocol, this is my first DYK!) Garnet Moss (talk) 23:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
    It is secondary sure, but it is self-published and I dont see anything indicating the author has academic works on the topic to make it a usable self-published source. So yes, please do include some other source for the statement. Thanks, nableezy - 14:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
    Sure thing; I'll note the "statement" is essentially just that this pair of lighthouses exists on the bay. If a simple tourism page would work, there's this one from the New Brunswick tourism department's website, noting that the lighthouse is twinned with West Quoddy. If something more 'serious' would be preferred, I'd have to cite a pair of pages, like this one from the official Canadian Register of Historic Places website, in conjunction with this one from the offician American National Register of Historic Places website. These don't reference one another, but they site the location in the same bay. Hopefully one of these options would work! Garnet Moss (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
    Im sorry, maybe I just dont have enough background here, but the tourism site just says It is the older sister light of West Quoddy Light in Lubec, Maine. It doesn't support the matching colors, which I know you can see from photos, but I dont know if this really rises to supported by a reliable source for the hook. nableezy - 16:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Not entirely sure how to respond, I disagree with that assessment. They're sister lights, as is described in multiple sources, and their colors match. I think the sourcing is adequate. But if the consensus is against that, then I could just rewrite it! Maybe something along the lines of "... that East Quoddy Head Lighthouse (pictured) and West Quoddy Head Light are twin lighthouses on Passamaquoddy Bay, one in Canada and the other in the United States?" Or I'm happy to take other suggestions. Garnet Moss (talk) 02:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Passing through; but you can keep the original ALT0, I think—except the rather unencyclopedic bit about color?—using
  • Jones, Ray (2023). Lighthouses of New England: From Maine to Long Island Sound. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 7–8. ISBN 978-1-4930-4727-7.

Or, how about, something more "ironic" (author's words not mine!):

ALT1 ... that the most easterly point of the United States is the West Quoddy Head Lighthouse, off the coast of Maine?

The name of this light is ironic, since the tower stands on the easternmost point of land in the United States. Situated on a forty-foot-high cliff, the light overlooks Quoddy Narrows, which separates the United States from Canada. Across this channel lies Campobello Island, with East Quoddy Head at its northeastern end; hence the name West Quoddy Head for the American light. West Quoddy is among the oldest lights in Maine.

Will review if required. Paging discussants: @Garnet Moss, Z1720, and Nableezy:. Cheers, ——Serial Number 54129 18:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your input, that's a great additional source and a good idea for an alternative basis for the DYK. I'd propose an amended original, plus a new version based on your suggestion, whichever is preferred! First,
Alt2 * "... that there is an East Quoddy Head Lighthouse (pictured) and a West Quoddy Head Lighthouse across the bay from one another, but that one is in Canada and the other is in the United States?"
and second,
What do people think? Garnet Moss (talk) 18:37, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree that the hook/source from Serial Number 54129 works, and if he wants to review I'm happy to withdraw from this one. nableezy - 18:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: Do you plan on returning to this nom?--Launchballer 10:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Apologies @Launchballer and Nableezy: I'm afraid I forgot about this. Nableezy, were you thinking of passing ALT1? I have no problem passing it over to you if that's OK (perhaps greater transparency that way, in any case!). You OK with that? ——Serial Number 54129 12:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Serial Number 54129 all yours. nableezy - 16:51, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
  • @Garnet Moss Since everyone seems to waffling on finishing this, I am taking over as reviewer. The article is new enough and long enough. I like Alt3 as a hook. The article currently does not state the hook fact as clearly as in the hook, and it doesn't have an inline citation to a reliable reference. That needs to be fixed before the hook can be approved. There are major WP:Verifiability problems with this article. In general, the referencing needs to be significantly improved before this can pass the WP:DYKCITE criteria. There are several paragraphs ending without inline citations, and much of the article is cited to www.lighthousefriends.com which is a WP:SELFPUBLISHED WP:BLOG. I note that the blogger has done the kindness of providing a bibliography to reliable RS, so I suggest trying to get a hold of those sources, and using those in the article instead. Unfortunately the blog itself is not usable for wikipedia's purposes as a reference. Likewise https://tourismnewbrunswick.ca/listing/head-harbour-lightstation-east-quoddy-head-lightstation , while a government website, is specifically a marketing department and is therefore questionable as a source for its lack of neutrality (if you are trying to trump of tourism, you aren't a neutral source). It also has no attributed author. Both of these websites need to be removed from the article as sources, and a minimum of two high quality independent references must be added to replace them. The source by Jones above is not even cited in the article currently, and would make one good addition to the article. Overall, this article is nowhere close to being ready for DYK. Given the age of the nom, I am putting a one week clock on this article to fix the above issues. If it isn't ready by then, I will be rejecting the hook.4meter4 (talk) 05:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
ALT3 cannot be used with its present wording as it is way above the 200 character limit; as such, it would have to be significantly shortened before it can be approved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Comment. Please don't distract the nominator by suggesting alt hooks which is not the biggest problem. Further, with so many verifiability problems, any hook suggested is likely pulled from unverified text, making the alt hooks useless. The hook isn't the main hold up, and it's best to not suggest alts until the article can pass WP:DYKCITE, which at this point in time is a definite complete fail. The verifiability issues are at critically bad place. It's not remotely close to being ready for a hook review because the article itself is poorly sourced to unreliable materials. If I do not see movement on improving this soon, it's going to be rejected.4meter4 (talk) 18:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

  • @4meter4: Thank you for the attention you've given, I've assembled most of the direct sources I believe I should need to address the raised concerns, and will be posting the revised article within the next couple of days. Besides a couple of additional resources, it's mostly just citing directly the material which was cited on the Lighthouse Friends website, (in other words, it all checks out.) I'd also note that I am in no way associated with any tourism effort, I don't even live in the immediate area. I just wanted to chime in because while hopefully I'll avoid missing your 7-day deadline, I'm traveling to see the eclipse, so I may find myself a day or two behind. I hope you understand! Garnet Moss (talk) 03:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
No prob. Just keep checking in when you can. If I see movement happening I can extend the deadline.4meter4 (talk) 03:32, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
  • @4meter4: Alright, back home. Went ahead and added the additional sources, I think it should be fairly robust now. All of the Lighthouse Friends claims checked out, so I could just source the government documents directly, in addition to using some books I had ready access to. All the relevant claims now have more solid reference bases, let me know if this is adequate. Garnet Moss (talk) 04:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

The referencing problems have been significantly improved. Reliable sources have been added with citations throughout. Article was new enough at the time of the nomination. The only issue is that there is no mention about West Quoddy Head Lighthouse being the most easterly point in the United States in the article. That means any hook proposals with that fact can not be promoted. This is not an issue though for Alt 2 which is in the article with an inline citation to an offline source by a reliable academic publisher. Approving hook alt2 only. This hook can be promoted. I like the pic and hope it will get featured.4meter4 (talk) 04:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Posted in error. Not relevant.

@4meter4, Garnet Moss, Z1720, and Nableezy: Parts of the article are copied directly from here: https://gregdisch.com/2024/01/04/west-quoddy-head-lighthouse/ by Magicpiano.[1] Compare these two paragraphs:

Source
The present light station includes a tower, former keeper’s quarters, service building, and oil house. The tower is circular, and is 49 feet in height, with the beacon at 83 feet above sea level. The light, magnified by a third-order Fresnel lens, has a range of 18 miles. The tower is built of brick, and painted in alternating horizontal red and white stripes. A small gabled entry vestibule, also brick, projects from the tower. The keeper’s house is a wood-frame structure.
Wikipedia
The present light station includes a tower, former keeper's quarters, service building, and oil house. The tower is circular, and is 49 feet (15 m) in height, with the beacon at 83 feet (25 m) above sea level. The light, magnified by a third-order Fresnel lens, has a range of 18 miles (29 km). The tower is built of brick, and painted in alternating horizontal red and white stripes. A small gabled entry vestibule, also brick, projects from the tower. The keeper's house is a wood-frame structure, 11⁄2 stories in height.

Some of the wording is still directly the same. Some facts (like the Fresnel lens) are not verified in the source that is cited in the footnote. Any sections copied or closely paraphrased should be completely rewritten, retaining the facts but not the language.

The first paragraph of "Description" is also directly copied from a different site: https://markspitzerdesigns.wordpress.com/2018/04/14/lubec-west-quoddy-head/ again by Magicpiano.[2]

Feel free to ask questions, Rjjiii (talk) 16:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Good catch Rjjiii. My patience has now run out with this one. The nomination is now more than two months old, and new issues keep on coming up. We obviously can't feature an article with copyright violations. It's time for us to let this one go.4meter4 (talk) 16:22, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Oof, disregard 4meter4, one of the alt hooks linked to West Quoddy Head Light which is the wrong lighthouse/article. I will now check the refs in East Quoddy Head Light. Sorry for the confusion, Rjjiii (talk) 16:28, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
No worries. I can understand the confusion, although it would be good to deal with that plagiarism in the other article... Let me know if there are any further issues.4meter4 (talk) 16:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding, the other article is old enough that copying may well go the other direction. @Garnet Moss: I checked the first two paragraphs of the "History" section of the (hopefully correct) article. There are no issues with close paraphrasing. I've added notes using the {{fact}} and {{failed verification}} tags. You can check the source code or mouse over on desktop to see the reasons. There are additional citations to primary sources from the 1800s, which may have similar issues. Rjjiii (talk) 17:16, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the attention. I believe a few of your notes can be satisfied just by rewording the offending sentences so as to not extend (however slightly) beyond the source's scope. Others I'll have to review my sources, its possible I made a mistake, but for example I know the book I intended to reference did use the term "famously foggy", so if you didnt see it I must've cited one book where I intended to cite another, (probably the one by D'Entremont.) I also forgot to cite where the name of the first keeper came from, what I cited was referencing the salary, not his name.
Regardless, just goes to show a job done in haste ends up being sloppy. Was trying to meet the 7-day deadline from 4meter4. Ill clean this up later tonight and let you know. This is surprisingly obscure lighthouse for being as photogenic as it is, maybe because its Canadian. And yea, glad the momentary confusion around the plagiarism accusations were cleared up. I know this is an old nomination by this point, but for a long time no one was seriously reviewing it, so Im as eager to tie it up as anyone. Garnet Moss (talk) 17:45, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
@Garnet Moss: It's no problem. I agree that none of the issues are huge. Regarding, "I know the book I intended to reference did use the term "famously foggy", so if you didnt see it I must've cited one book where I intended to cite another" is the year/edition correct? I suspect you have a later edition with more info than the 2003 version cited. I've gone through the "Description" section and either adjusted the article or citations for verification. I also added a line describing the pathway to the lighthouse. And sorry again about my initial confusion. Rjjiii (talk) 02:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
@Rjjiii: Alright, I think it really truly should be all good now lol. You were right about me having the editions confused re: the Crompton book, I had been reading the 2018 version, while I had cited the 2003 version. I also reworded the offending sentences to not lean out beyond their sources, removed some extraneous detail, and added some more information about the Snell family of keepers. I also clarified the timeline of the preservation group and fixed the reference for West Quoddy Head. I believe this should alleviate any further concerns, let me know if I'm wrong about that! Garnet Moss (talk) 06:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Looks good! Everything in the body text meets WP:DYKCITE, and the photo is excellent. Rjjiii (talk) 21:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
@Rjjiii I notice the text was modified to include the easternmost point hook fact. Are you approving more than one of the proposed hooks, or we sticking with the earlier approved Alt2?4meter4 (talk) 21:45, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

@4meter4: I agree with your approval of ALT 2. Alt 4, alt 3, and alt 1 all have errors that are not present in the article's text. Rjjiii (talk) 22:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Head_Harbour_Lighthouse&oldid=1218668838"