Template:Did you know nominations/Audenried Tunnel
- The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 21:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Audenried Tunnel[edit]
- ... that the Audenried Tunnel contributes up to 80% of Catawissa Creek's acidity?
ALT 1: ... that the Audenried Tunnel normally has a discharge of around 8500 gallons per minute, but can reach 300,000 gallons per minute during heavy rainstorms?
ALT 2: ... that only 1,300 feet (400 m) of the Audenried Tunnel have been mapped since at least 1971?
Moved to mainspace by King jakob c 2 (talk). Self nominated at 23:23, 19 November 2013 (UTC).
All three hooks verified. Length/newness verified. Prose generally fine, needs slight tweaking regarding the acidity percentages (80-84). No other issues detected. My only concern are some statements in the hydrology section which do not seem to be supported by the references, ex.This is 3.73 times the total maximum daily load for manganese. Where do these numbers come from? Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:13, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- @Dr.K.: The citations are located at the end of the paragraph. The hydrology section is mostly cited in here. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 02:19, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- @King jakob c 2: I know where the citations are, thanks. I cannot find the number 3.73 contained in the statement: This is 3.73 times the total maximum daily load for manganese. in any citation. Same goes for other statements of that kind in the hydrology section. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- I took data in the Measured Sample Data/load per day column and divided it by the allowable/load per day column. This is permitted per WP:CALC. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 02:47, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- The problem with this is why are these calculations notable? And what is their significance? If they are indeed notable or significant some reliable source must have covered them and commented on them. My concern is that these numbers represent meaningless statistics without any context provided for them by commentary from a reliable source. In this case I think they should be removed. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 02:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- Fixed. The percentages are mentioned in the table on page 12 of the tmdl document. --Jakob (Scream about the things I've broken) 13:50, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Good to go. Thank you King Jakob. Best regards. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 18:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
