Template:Did you know nominations/Operation Hardnose
- 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 97198 (talk) 08:50, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Operation Hardnose
[edit]- ... that illiterate Operation Hardnose spies used altered survival radios to count and report traffic on the Ho Chi Minh Trail?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Salé
- Comment: How do you get an illiterate Asian peasant to report on the enemy? You equip him with a radio with pictograms next to its buttons, teach him to press a button once for every item spotted, and have him push another button to automatically submit the information. How useful was the information? It showed the United States intelligence community that the Ho Chi Minh Trail could be impeded, but not blocked or cut.
Created by Georgejdorner (talk). Self nominated at 01:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC).
New enough, (more than) long enough, and free of any apparent major policy issues (ie, the article is neutral and apparently well cited). However, because all of the references are to books to which I do not have access, I am accepting all of them in good faith. For similar reasons, I am also unable to check for plagiarism or issues of close paraphrasing. The hook is short enough and certainly interesting, and while its content also appears in the article, I am unable to independently verify its veracity because of my aforementioned lack of access to the books used as references. Also, QPQ has been done.
- One potential issue, however, is that the lede of the article uses the term "semi-literate" to describe the Lao Theung, while the hook refers to them as "illiterate". Perhaps this discrepancy should be resolved before the hook runs on the main page? Other than this (possibly minor) issue and the simple fact that I am accepting all of the citations in good faith, everything else looks good to me. Michael Barera (talk) 19:14, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
- Excellent point. Okay, I have standardized at "illiterate"; any Lao Theung who was literate was appointed as an officer, and officers weren't doing the counting.
- And you may make random checks for plagiarism/paraphrasing by plugging some of my text into Google, or you can use the script supplied. Doesn't matter; I always "roll my own".Georgejdorner (talk) 21:25, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Georgejdorner. Everything looks good to me (although I'm still accepting the references in good faith). Also, thanks for the tip on plagiarism checking; I use the "Dup detector" tool for checking Wikipedia articles against their online sources, but your point about running simple Google searches for content cited from book sources is a good one. Thanks again, for the tip as well as a great new article! Michael Barera (talk) 03:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
