Template:Did you know nominations/Leighton Battery
- 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) 23:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Leighton Battery
- ... that, also it was envisioned to have all major ports in Australia protected by 5.25 inch dual purpose coastal artillery/antiaircraft guns, the Leighton Battery became the only one operational? Source: Page 4: Although 5.25 inch dual purpose guns were planned for the defence of every major port in Australia, the Leighton Battery was the only one which actually became operational & Page 3: Leighton Battery was the only 5.25 inch gun battery to come into operation in Australia
- ALT1:... that, in 2015, after a 20 year search, a gun barrel from the HMAS Sydney and a gun shield from the HMAS Adelaide, discovered on a rubbish tip, were fitted together and placed on display at Leighton Battery? Source: Dumped World War II gun shield to be refurbished and displayed in Perth & World War II naval gun shield takes pride of place at Perth's former artillery base
- ALT2:... that, in 2015, after a 20 year search, a gun barrel from the HMAS Sydney and a gun shield from the HMAS Adelaide were fitted together and placed on display at Leighton Battery? Source: Same as ALT1
- ALT3:... that, after a 20 year search, a gun barrel from the HMAS Sydney and a gun shield from the HMAS Adelaide, discovered on a tip, were fitted together and placed on display at Leighton Battery? Source: Dumped World War II gun shield to be refurbished and displayed in Perth & World War II naval gun shield takes pride of place at Perth's former artillery base
- ALT2:... that, in 2015, after a 20 year search, a gun barrel from the HMAS Sydney and a gun shield from the HMAS Adelaide were fitted together and placed on display at Leighton Battery? Source: Same as ALT1
- ALT1:... that, in 2015, after a 20 year search, a gun barrel from the HMAS Sydney and a gun shield from the HMAS Adelaide, discovered on a rubbish tip, were fitted together and placed on display at Leighton Battery? Source: Dumped World War II gun shield to be refurbished and displayed in Perth & World War II naval gun shield takes pride of place at Perth's former artillery base
- Reviewed: British Rail Passenger Timetable
Created by Calistemon (talk). Self-nominated at 14:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC).
- Comment: "discovered on a tip" does not make sense in U.S. English, as dump or rubbish dump are common usage. Could just delete those four words. David notMD (talk) 15:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- David notMD Would adding the word "rubbish" to make it discovered on a rubbish tip make it clear enough? Tip is what the source article uses, I checked to be sure. Calistemon (talk) 02:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be enough. (I saw that the source used "tip," but as the hook is not quoting it, your discretion.) David notMD (talk) 02:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- No worries, I have amended ALT1 and proposed and ALT2 without the tip section. Calistemon (talk) 02:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Article creation date versus filing date okay. Article length okay. Article sourcing and neutrality good and no evident signs of copyvio. QPQ done with diligence. The hooks are neutral and sourced. In terms of hook length, ALT0 is 197 characters, ALT1 is over at 211, ALT2 is 181. I'm of the school of thought that DYK hooks should be a little bit mysterious, so in terms of hook interest, unlike the previous commenter, I like using "tip", precisely because it is not known to American readers. So maybe ALT1 can be reworked to be within length (and shouldn't the ship names be italicized as well)? But if some formulation of ALT1 is out, then I think ALT0 is preferable to ALT2 in terms of interest. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Wasted Time R Thank you for your review. I have placed the ship names in italics, as requested and re-worked ALT1 into ALT3, which should comply with length requirements. Is it suitable? Calistemon (talk) 13:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Actually the recommended way to do the ship names in WP military articles is with a template, such as in this case {{HMAS}}, which for the example markup {{HMAS|Sydney|1912|6}} generates the HMAS part in regular font and just the name in italics, example HMAS Sydney. Otherwise ALT3 is okay with me. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
- Tempplate used as recommended. Calistemon (talk) 04:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
