Template:Did you know nominations/Chain boat
- 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 PFHLai (talk) 08:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Chain boat[edit]
... that a chain boat (pictured) was a type of river craft in the late 18th and early 19th centuries on European rivers that used a chain laid along the riverbed to haul itself along pulling a string of barges?- Alt 1... that a chain boat (pictured) was a type of river craft in the late 19th and early 20th centuries on European rivers that used a chain laid along the riverbed to haul itself along pulling a string of barges?
- Reviewed: London Irish Amateur
Created by Bermicourt (talk). Self nominated at 10:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC).
Reviewed. Interesting new article, good length and well written. Hook is formatted correctly. Would recommend the author adds additional inline ciations but I would say it is good to go. Wee Curry Monster talk 16:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Much as I hate to disagree with two reviewers in close succession, this is definitely not adequately sourced by DYK standards, where the rule of thumb is one inline source citation per paragraph (see WP:DYKSG#D2). In particular, the first paragraph of History and the first two paragraphs of Control and navigation are unsourced, and there's only a single source in the entire four-paragraph Auxilliary engines section. These will need to be addressed before the nomination can be approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- We've added seven more references to cover the areas mentioned. Is that now sufficient? --Bermicourt (talk) 15:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for the improved sourcing; that issue is taken care of. I think this is much closer. However, there are two fundamental issues with the hook: first, the article indicates that chain boats came into usage in the second half of the 19th century, which contradicts the hook, which places them in the century prior. Second, the "pulling a string of barges" claim in the hook does not appeared to be backed up by an inline source citation, at least not one placed by the end a sentence in which this fact it stated. I've struck the original hook; please create an ALT hook that deals with these issues (and update the article accordingly), while still staying within the 200-character (including spaces) maximum hook size. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:03, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
- Done. The phrase "string of barges" is actually a quotation from ref 2. --Bermicourt (talk) 05:12, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- Only the hook dates have been fixed; the hook sourcing issue with the article remains. The sentence with the phrase "string of barges" is not itself sourced; by DYK rules it needs to be. The only uses of ref 2 are in the first sentence of the lead, before any mention of barges is made, so you need to add a cite to ref 2 in the appropriate place. I'm also a bit worried about your saying "string of barges" is a quote from ref 2: please be sure your use from this source is properly credited, including quotes for any copied phrases. (Alternatively, you can paraphrase what's there, so long as it isn't close paraphrasing.) BlueMoonset (talk) 15:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Okay so I've now added the specific reference in question and quoted the exact page and sentence in a footnote at the end of the "string of barges" sentence. I've also added other references that reinforce it, either in German or in English and referring to a "train" of barges. --Bermicourt (talk) 21:23, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
I moved the quoted ref to after the "string of barges" sentence (it was before it), for clarity. ALT1 is supported by sources, one quoted, the others offline so accepted in good faith; also AGF that there is no close paraphrasing. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:03, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
