Template:Did you know nominations/2014 oil spill on Sundarbans

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) 08:24, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

2014 oil spill on Sundarbans

(

)

... that 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal; 92,000 US gal) of oil were spilt into the Sela River (pictured)—a home to endangered Irrawaddy and Ganges dolphins—in Sundarbans, Bangladesh, on 9 December 2014?

Reviewed: Betty Morgan (politician)
Comment: A (predictably) failed ITN nomination.

Created by Ctg4Rahat (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 19:24, 15 December 2014 (UTC).

New enough, long enough, QPQ done, passes copyvio checks. Article is well-referenced. Hook verified inline. GTG. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 20:56, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

I added the photo, which is yet to be verified as free to use. If you don't want to wait for picture verification, don't use the picture. --George Ho (talk) 02:25, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Images have been granted permission through OTRS. - Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 06:12, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

The hook is well over 200 characters, and thus ineligible for DYK. A shorter ALT hook will have to be proposed. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:00, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: The original hook which I approved, which can be seen here, was of suitable length. Perhaps that hook could be reverted to? Another user added to the original hook after approval. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 15:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: I have reverted to the revision added by Thine Antique Pen. - Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 16:42, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

I have further restored the hook to reflect the modifications of George Ho: both the new (moved) article name and the "pictured" are restored. However, the hook needs to be revised as an ALT1 so it makes grammatical sense, which it doesn't now (please do not modify the original hook again, and be sure to use the proper name of the river), and the article itself requires a significant copyedit before this can be approved for DYK. For the latter, you may wish to request assistance from the Guild of Copy Editors. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:46, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

ALT1: ~~... that 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal; 92,000 US gal) of oil were spilt into the Sela River (pictured) in Sundarbans, Bangladesh, on 9 December 2014?~~

@BlueMoonset, Thine Antique Pen: I added ALT1 to your pleasure and made some changes. George Ho (talk) 12:06, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Copyediting has been done by Biblioworm. Thanks a lot. - Rahat (Talk * Contributions) 20:14, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment: Is it necessary to convert into both Imperial gallons and US gallons? I should think liters and US gallons sufficient for all but the tiny minority who never learned liters and don't live in the US. At this scale knowing precisely how much isn't even as important to the reader as the order of magnitude (i.e., a lot). Astro interest (talk) 22:49, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

This article is new enough and long enough. It has been copyedited and the prose is now adequate. The image is appropriately licensed, the article is neutral and does not seem to close paraphrase the sources. However, I question the accuracy of the hook. The vessel was salvaged and the amount of oil stated was what the vessel was carrying and not necessarily the amount that spilled. I suggest these alternative hooks: Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

ALT1A: ... that 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal) of oil may have spilt into the Sela River (pictured) in Sundarbans, Bangladesh, in December 2014?
ALT2: ... that 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal) of fuel oil may have spilled (pictured) when an oil tanker sank in the Sundarbans, Bangladesh, in December 2014?
ALT3: ... that in December 2014, a large oil spill occurred in a UNESCO World Heritage Site in the Sundarbans, Bangladesh?

I think ALT1A and ALT2 are misleading in their own way with the word "may have". The Telegraph source (FN1) says "around 77,000 gallons of oil spilled", which would seem to indicate nearly all of what was in the boat did spill. Rather than "may have", if a qualifier is needed, then how about adding "up to" before the actual figures are given? BlueMoonset (talk) 16:17, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I have been looking around the sources for the article and a couple of the later ones mentioned a considerably smaller volume of oil being spilt. Here are more suggestions then: Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

ALT1B: ... that up to 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal) of oil was spilt into the Sela River (pictured) in Sundarbans, Bangladesh, in December 2014?
ALT2B: ~~... that up to 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal) of oil was spilt (pictured) when an oil tanker sank in the Sundarbans, Bangladesh, in December 2014?~~

New reviewer needed for ALT1B and ALT2B hooks. (I struck ALT1, and changed ALT2B's "spilled" to "spilt" for consistency.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:08, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

:REVIEW COMPLETED - The following review was completed by Esemono

QPQ for Betty Morgan (politician)

Article created by Ctg4Rahat on December 15, 2014 and has 5590 characters of readable prose

NPOV

ALT2B is interesting, short enough characters and sourced with Refs 3

Hook is sourced to :"Around 77,000 gallons of oil spilled into the waters of the world-famous Sundarbans nature reserve in neighbouring Bangladesh on Tuesday after a collision between a tanker and another vessel."

Every paragraph sourced

Earwig @ Toolserver Copyvio Detector found no copyvio

File:Spilt_oil_in_Sundarban.jpg has been archived in the Wikimedia OTRS system. Full documentation is available only to OTRS volunteers as ticket #2014122210002551

GTG -- Esemono (talk) 01:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

@Esemono: if the source says the oil spilled because of a collision between a tanker and another vessel, then it seems misleading to say the oil spilled because the tanker sank. Yoninah (talk) 22:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

How about ALT3 then -- Esemono (talk) 23:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

ALT3: ... that in December 2014 up to 350,000 litres (77,000 imp gal) of oil was spilt (pictured) after an oil tanker collided with a cargo vessel in the Sundarbans, Bangladesh?

Thank you, I think that works better. I changed "another ship" to "a cargo vessel" per the source. Hook ref verified and cited inline. ALT3 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 00:21, 27 February 2015 (UTC)