Template:Did you know nominations/Hydroelectricity in 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 SL93 (talk) 18:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Hydroelectricity in Turkey
- ... that the kisslip himri needs to be found, because of hydroelectricity in Turkey? Source: "Restricted to the Euphrates and Tigris river drainages, although the precise extent of its range is unknown. Its biology is poorly understood" [1]
Improved to Good Article status by Chidgk1 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:34, 28 March 2022 (UTC).
- Presumably the fish are threatened by dams, not by the use of hydroelectricity... (t · c) buidhe 05:12, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- Unlike Wikipedia the cite uses a hyphen so search for "Kiss-lip himri". Page 73 of the cite says "hydropower hazard high". But as the hook says not enough is known - fish could be just fine I guess - I hope someone will read it and give some money to scientists to find out. Whether dams would have been built just for irrigation if there was no possibility of hydropower I don't know - certainly proponents say it is the hydropower which has repaid cost. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Chidgk1: (a) Buddy's making a point about English grammar. Hydroelectricity is an abstract principle and a subset of electricity when differentiated by source. Dams are walls thrown across rivers. It's impossible that the fish are being hurt by the concept. (b) Similarly, I don't know if it's the result of a typo or mistaken edit by someone else but the current hook makes no sense. It has the abstract form of "the dinner needs to be found, because of the guests coming over." The verb needs to be changed to something on topic and a more logical connection established.
On the other hand, you just need a new hook. "We should go check and see if these fish are OK because maybe they aren't" isn't an actual statement. The provided cite above needs some info from p. 43 to work as support, but you're really trying to say something about the Turkish hydropower authorities shirking their duty to check on the consquences of their actions.
Relatedly, before this can be approved, you'll need to go to somewhere on the community portal and get some copy editing done. Sentences like "Large hydropower may be bad..." and "...dammed hydro can be dispatched within 3 to 5 minutes..." will need reworking. — LlywelynII 18:48, 12 May 2022 (UTC)- @LlywelynII: I have requested copyedit at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors/Requests#Hydroelectricity_in_Turkey If you or anyone else have a better hook suggestion I will be happy to hear it. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Chidgk1: (a) Buddy's making a point about English grammar. Hydroelectricity is an abstract principle and a subset of electricity when differentiated by source. Dams are walls thrown across rivers. It's impossible that the fish are being hurt by the concept. (b) Similarly, I don't know if it's the result of a typo or mistaken edit by someone else but the current hook makes no sense. It has the abstract form of "the dinner needs to be found, because of the guests coming over." The verb needs to be changed to something on topic and a more logical connection established.
- Unlike Wikipedia the cite uses a hyphen so search for "Kiss-lip himri". Page 73 of the cite says "hydropower hazard high". But as the hook says not enough is known - fish could be just fine I guess - I hope someone will read it and give some money to scientists to find out. Whether dams would have been built just for irrigation if there was no possibility of hydropower I don't know - certainly proponents say it is the hydropower which has repaid cost. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
- ALT1... that the kisslip himri has disappeared: can you find out whether dams built for hydroelectricity in Turkey were responsible? Source: "Restricted to the Euphrates and Tigris river drainages, although the precise extent of its range is unknown. Its biology is poorly understood" [2]
- ALT2... that the kisslip himri has not been seen for years: can you find out whether dams built for hydroelectricity in Turkey are responsible and if so can we fix them? Source: "Restricted to the Euphrates and Tigris river drainages, although the precise extent of its range is unknown. Its biology is poorly understood" [3]
- Really focused on the fish, huh? — LlywelynII 01:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Seemed an amusing name - the rest of the article (most of which I wrote) looks rather boring - maybe you or someone else can spot something else hooky? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Drive-by observation: this hook is very much out of tone for DYK. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Sammi Brie I don't understand - I know we don't write "you" in articles but is there some rule against it in hooks? Chidgk1 (talk) 12:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I am aware, using "you" in hooks is discouraged. I'm not sure if there's anything in the guidelines specifically against it, but from experience hooks that use it have tended to be rewritten. Personally I would rewrite the ALTs as something like this:
- ALT3 ... that hydroelectricity in Turkey has been suggested to be a cause for the disappearance of the kisslip himri?
- The issue I see with ALTs 1-3 is that the article merely states that the species may be threatened and that hydroelectricity production has been suggested as a cause, but this has not been proven (indeed, the article doesn't even describe the species as having "disappeared"). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:27, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- ALT3 looks good - I hope someone reads it and is motivated to prove or disprove the hypotheses. Chidgk1 (talk) 17:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- ALT4 ... that hydroelectricity in Turkey may be why the kisslip himri has not been seen recently?
- I still couldn't support those because the source and article do not back up their claim. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 00:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I am aware, using "you" in hooks is discouraged. I'm not sure if there's anything in the guidelines specifically against it, but from experience hooks that use it have tended to be rewritten. Personally I would rewrite the ALTs as something like this:
- Sammi Brie I don't understand - I know we don't write "you" in articles but is there some rule against it in hooks? Chidgk1 (talk) 12:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Drive-by observation: this hook is very much out of tone for DYK. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Seemed an amusing name - the rest of the article (most of which I wrote) looks rather boring - maybe you or someone else can spot something else hooky? Chidgk1 (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Really focused on the fish, huh? — LlywelynII 01:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
ALT5: ... that the kisslip himri in Turkey might face a dam problem? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless of the sourcing issues, that hook may fall afoul of WP:EGG. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, but IAR, honestly — EGG comes from the principle of least astonishment, which doesn't really apply to DYK. There are EGG violations that make the hook unworkable, but I don't think this is one of 'em. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 06:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- theleekycauldron Excellent - why didn't I think of that - ALT5 is the best hook Chidgk1 (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'd support ALT5. Sure, it's a bit EGGy, but it will get more interest than any other proposed hook. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless of the sourcing issues, that hook may fall afoul of WP:EGG. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Full review needed now that hook discussion seems to have borne fruit. Note that a copyedit request to GOCE has been made. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Review:
The article is long enough and recent enough (passed GA review on March 27, nominated for DYK on March 28). The above-mentioned copyedit request [4] is a good idea but the article is good enough as is. There is nothing serious enough to hold it up. I didn't go line by line to verify sourcing and to check for copyvio because that was done recently in the GA review here. The article prose are neutral. (On a sidenote: The article lists many issues and complications associated with dam projects, but that happens with any large public project.) The lead image is properly licensed, it can be used on the main-page, if need be. QPQ is done. I think ALT5 is acceptable and fine. Manual of style's WP:EGG primarily applies to Wikipedia's article content where first-pass-reader clarity and reproduction of the content (say in print form) are important factors. The DYK section of the main-page is inherently a hooky / interesting / catchy one-liner type of list, with no encyclopedic permanency, so there is leeway and WP:EGG isn't 'strictly' applicable IMO. I think the nom is good to go. Just a note about ALT5: I prefer "might be facing" as opposed to the current wording "might face". I leave that to the promoting editor. Bammesk (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Review:
