Template:Did you know nominations/Lake Palomas
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:31, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lake Palomas[edit]
- ... that parts of southern New Mexico and Chihuahua were covered by the former Lake Palomas, parts of which existed as recently as 500 years ago? Constructional beach ridges dated at ca. 230 and 495 cal yr B.P.
- Reviewed: Shinnyo
Moved to mainspace by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 16:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC).
Article new enough and long enough. Article is referenced and hook is sourced, with paywalled source taken agf. No policy issues were identified with the article. Does the source text use the word "surprisingly" for the 500yo date?--Kevmin § 21:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- Yes although given the size of some more recent of these paleolakes one wonders if it's outdated. I will need to provide a QPQ beforehand, however. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:29, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'd suggest removing the "surprisingly" to keep the article neutral, given the age of the source and the 60+ years of research that have happened since.--Kevmin § 22:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Kevmin: Done and added QPQ. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:54, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'd suggest removing the "surprisingly" to keep the article neutral, given the age of the source and the 60+ years of research that have happened since.--Kevmin § 22:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
