Template:Did you know nominations/Space industry of India

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Lee Vilenski (talk) 14:36, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Space industry of India

(
)

Created by Raymond3023 and expanded by Aman.kumar.goel. Nominated by Aman.kumar.goel (talk) at 05:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC).

  • This is not a full review, just a comment, but I'm not sure this is ready to go. While an "expand" tag is fine, the "rewrite" tag is considered enough of a danger sign to generally stop an article from appearing on the front page at all. I realize you stuck it there yourself, but please resolve the issue. Additionally, I think the article has some mixed focus. The article should, in my opinion, specifically be on the industry side - corporations, factories, construction, that kind of thing, yet there's some parts that just seem to recap what ISRO has done. I realize that ISRO contracts are probably very closely tied to this, but I'd be careful about drawing a line to avoid repetition or unclear focus. Finally, I think the hook can use some work - what does launching a satellite "for" a country even mean? Were these contracts with national governments other than India? Or just any business involving entities from outside India? Did these launches use homegrown tech, or were these pre-assembled gear from elsewhere that just happened to be launched in India because it's at the right latitude? Source isn't really clear, it seems like puffery. SnowFire (talk) 05:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Aman.kumar.goel: Did you see the above? Per the instructions, please add the nomination page to the watchlist to see comments. If you disagree with my comments that's fine but some sort of response is expected to avoid a reject on the hook. SnowFire (talk) 09:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
* the "rewrite" tag is considered enough of a danger sign to generally stop an article from appearing on the front page at all. It was me actually. I yet have planned to expand article and rewrite that section in a much better. But not have been getting sufficient time for a while. Better I do it now. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 11:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
SnowFire You may further proceed your reveiw now. Regards Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 12:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Sorry about the delay - your ping didn't seem to work, and as noted before, the above was just a comment, not a full review. That said, if you'd like me to do the review, sure, I can, but the original problem I brought up remains that the hook isn't very good, in my opinion. "Number of countries" is just not a useful metric here, it's very press release hypey, at least not without further clarification. The companies involved in producing an iPhone stretch through many countries; it's not a big deal. Are there any alternate hooks? Or are there any better sources than that Times of India article that actually clarify, in detail, what is actually being measured by this "for 33 countries"? SnowFire (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
It seems like that I agree with you that number of countries looks a bit advert. Since the number is dynamic as well, I better get rid of it. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 04:56, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
  • This is not a review but I'd suggest that the article be given a copyedit as the grammar feels off at times. The promotional tone mentioned above also seems to still exist and would need to be addressed before this nomination can be approved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:29, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
I've left a request at WP:GOCE/R. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Any update here on article quality / alternate hook ideas / prose quality? Leaning toward a reject, it's been a month or so and DYK is intended for the newest entries. No shame in not making DYK if the article just needs more time. SnowFire (talk) 19:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Just waiting for someone at GOCE to take a look at this. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:34, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Hi! I'm from the GOCE and I wanted to let you know that I just completed a copyedit of the article. Best of luck on the nomination! Aerin17 (talk) 00:58, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  • As the article has received a GOCE copyedit, a new review can be done. Courtesy ping Snowfire. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:10, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@SnowFire: Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:10, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I saw, yes. We still have the issue of an appropriate hook. I also still think that some of the article, including the lede, focuses on some inappropriate metrics like "number of startups". Anyway, in the realm of more easily measurable thing, I think the raw number of satellites works better than the number of countries. Maybe something like this - thoughts, @Aman.kumar.goel: ?
    ALT1: ... that the space industry of India has supported the launch of more than 100 domestic satellites and more than 300 foreign satellites?
  • — Preceding unsigned comment added by SnowFire (talk • contribs) 06:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Nice clean up! The Alt1 hook is verified to the Times of India article. The article is new enough, long enough, and is now within policy. Aman.kumar.goel should get credit for considerably expanding and improving; and Raymond3023 for creating the article.4meter4 (talk) 01:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Space_industry_of_India&oldid=1017771398"