Template:Did you know nominations/Aries (rocket)

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) 17:23, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Aries (rocket)[edit]

(

)

Aries launch in 1991

... that the "Fat Albert" sounding rocket had its name changed to Aries (pictured) because the Naval Research Laboratory considered it "more dignified"?
Source: "The Naval Research Laboratory asked Robert D. Arritt of its Space Science Division to choose a more dignified name." [1]

Reviewed: Fugitive dust
Comment: Note that DYKcheck will not show a 5x expansion, as I had to clear a cut-and-paste copyvio. The previous good version was 301 characters, needing 1505 for a 5x expansion.

5x expanded by The Bushranger (talk). Self-nominated at 23:44, 10 December 2017 (UTC).

Hook is cited to A Dictionary of the Space Age, a cached version of which is here. Article is long enough, and obviously free of copyvios; image is PD. In terms of expansion, effectively you have done the equivalent of deleting the original article per CSD G12 and rewriting it from scratch - can one of our DYK stalwarts like Yoninah confirm this is okay? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:54, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi The Bushranger, review follows:five times expansion from this version confirmed (as per supplementary rule A4 copyvio text does not count for article size. NB: I confirmed the now deleted revisions of article to be copyvio of this page by checking deleted revisions; article is well written and cited to reliable sources; hook is interesting and cited in the article, I couldn't access the page cited but I will AGF it backs up the fact; QPQ has been done; hook image is listed as PD on Commons but the link (to a USAF website) no longer has the image, happy to AGF on this also - Dumelow (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I had the edit window open whilst reviewing and we conflicted. The copyvio text is discounted per rule A4, I think: "Fivefold expansion is calculated from the previously existing article, no matter how bad it was (copyvios are an exception)". Cheers - Dumelow (talk) 21:22, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

The book source is online via Google Books so you can turn the AGF tick into a fully-fledged green one. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)