Template:Did you know nominations/Saving Mes Aynak

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 Jolly Ω Janner 06:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Saving Mes Aynak

(

)

A view of Mes Aynak

~~... that the director of Saving Mes Aynak presented Afghani leaders with a petition signed by 100,000 people in support of the preservation of Mes Aynak (pictured)?~~

Reviewed: Papa's Cabin
Comment: Moved to main namespace on 30 January 2016‎. Additional images that can be used are at Mes Aynak.

Created by Mimiwilcox (talk). Nominated by Northamerica1000 (talk) at 03:28, 30 January 2016 (UTC).

: New enough, long enough, referenced and within policy; hook ok; QPQ here (I think); image not used in article, otherwise good to go, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:22, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@Jolly Janner: The image is now used in the article. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:14, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I have removed this from the prep areas on behalf of Yoninah for not being hooky. Jolly Ω Janner 18:34, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

How is the hook not interesting? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:00, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
I see on the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Prep 2 the suggestion to "replace the second "Mes Aynak" with "the 5,000-year-old archeological site"". That's an idea, but this notion is not verified in the Mes Aynak article itself. It seems unfair for me to have to now research and work on two articles in order for this to move forward. What if the site is not 5,000 years old? It's unfair for me to have to research this unverified claim from a different article in order to qualify this article for DYK, which is properly sourced. Perhaps the user that suggested the alt at the dyk talk page should perform the research and update both of the articles. Here's some alts below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

ALT1 ~~... that the director of Saving Mes Aynak presented Afghani leaders with a petition signed by 100,000 people in support of the preservation of the archaeological site (pictured)?~~
ALT2 ~~... that the director of Saving Mes Aynak presented Afghani leaders with a petition signed by 100,000 people in support of the preservation of the archaeological site (pictured)?~~

I did a bit of digging. The 5,000 years figure may have come from http://www.savingmesaynak.com/ but it is important to note that this is refering to the archaelogical site i.e. the mines around the area. The monestary, which is also refered to as Mes Aynak is dated to 200-300 CE (p.176). I don't know how reliable this 5,000 figure is though. Should we be using figures from the film itself? It would be ideal if some other source confirmed this. Anyway, just thought I'd post this to see if it helped. Jolly Ω Janner 07:37, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Jolly Janner: What about just using one of the alts above, which are sans the 5,000 claim? North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

They're just very slight variants on the original hook. I didn't find anything wrong with it in the first place, hence why I promoted it. I will ping User:Yoninah for opinions. Jolly Ω Janner 07:47, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I also think the initial hook was quite fine to begin with. The alts were based upon the suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Prep 2, where it is stated, "It would be better to replace the second "Mes Aynak" with "the 5,000-year-old archeological site..." North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I think the 5,000-year-old was the punchline, but can't be sure without Yoninah's opinion. I have given it an inline citation in the article by the way. Jolly Ω Janner 08:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Per copy editing to the article by Jolly Janner, below is an alt. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

ALT3: ... that the director of Saving Mes Aynak presented Afghani leaders with a petition signed by 100,000 people in support of the preservation of the 5,000-year-old archaeological site (pictured)?

Hi everyone. Sorry I was offline for a day. The reason I felt the hook was not hooky was because it was repetitive, like Did you know that the organizers of Save the Whales circulated a petition to save the whales? Also, many more readers can identify with what "saving the whales" is about than can identify "saving Mes Aynak". ALT3 is definitely an improvement, thanks. Since I provided the 5,000-year-old archaeological site fact, I'll leave it to another reviewer to approve ALT3. Yoninah (talk) 18:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

(ALT3): personally didn't mind the repetition (rhetorical device), but circumlocution ok too.. Hook referenced etc and image now used in article; good to go, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:36, 21 February 2016 (UTC)