Template:Did you know nominations/Le Pouce

The following discussion 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 Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Le Pouce

(

)

... ~~that Charles Darwin is credited with being the first person to climb Le Pouce (pictured)?~~

Created/expanded by Bar Code Symmetry (talk). Self nom at 01:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The reference used to support the hook is a weak source. Mauritius Attractions is a commercial travel company, and should not be used to support such an important historical claim. There is no evidence that the website has an editorial board or fact-checking mechanism. Could you cite a scholarly book or mainstream newspaper article for the claim? --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 03:37, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I can only find a bunch of weak sources like [link removed due to being on a blacklisted website], this, and this. In Google Books, I found books that say "he climbed it on the 2nd of May" and leave it at that. The tricky part is that I keep getting French books about thumbs instead of what I want. Maybe an alternate hook? BCS (Talk) 00:06, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Neither of the sources, which you linked above, is reliable source. Suggest an alternate hook. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 01:46, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that Le Pouce is named after its thumb-like peak (pictured)? BCS (Talk) 02:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

The article currently is of 1573 characters. But Mauritius Attractions is used to support two vital statements. Since MA is an unreliable source, I'm not sure whether those statements should stay in the article. Asking for a second pair of eyes. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 01:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Source~~s are~~ is poor... shame about the article. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Which sources are poor besides Mauritius attractions? -- BCS (t · c · !) 02:14, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Changed. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Can't I just remove the sentences sourced by the reference? -- BCS (t · c · !) 16:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

That won't work. With those sentences, the article is only minimally long enough for DYK. Without them, it's too short. --Orlady (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Can I expand the article a bit more and then remove the sentences? -- BCS (t · c · !) 19:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes -- but do make sure you have reliable sources for the new content! --Orlady (talk) 20:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Done -- BCS (t · c · !) 00:10, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Indeed you did. I did a little more editing (and a tiny expansion) in my review. Article length and dates are fine. Sources are solid, and footnoting is ample. I did not see indications of plagiarism. However, the source cited to support the hook fact does not state that the name is based on the mountain's thumb-like appearance. I found that fact supported by page 484 of Darwin. I did not edit the citation yet. The article creator might want to cite Darwin and provide a second footnote to a nonreliable source that has more modern language than Darwin used. With a good footnote for the hook fact, this will be ready to go. --Orlady (talk) 05:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Added a ref. Thanks for your help! -- BCS (t · c · !) 18:25, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

All is OK now. Thanks for your efforts -- and for the reading about Mauritius that I did in order to review this hook. --Orlady (talk) 19:11, 11 March 2012 (UTC)