Template:Did you know nominations/Project Kingfisher; AUM-N-4 Diver; AUM-N-6 Puffin; SUM-N-2 Grebe

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) 14:13, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Project Kingfisher, AUM-N-4 Diver, AUM-N-6 Puffin, SUM-N-2 Grebe, AUM-N-2 Petrel[edit]

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

)

Diagram of Kingfisher A missile

... that a series of aerial torpedo-carrying missiles were developed for the U.S. Navy under Project Kingfisher (prototype illustrated), including Petrel, Diver, Grebe, and Puffin?
- ALT1:... that Petrels, Divers, Grebes, and Puffins were all part of Project Kingfisher?

Reviewed: San Clemente, El Petén; Torslunda plates; Large frogmouth; Digiday
Comment: The three individual missile pages are new; Project Kingfisher was expanded from a redirect to an entirely different topic (per its hatnote).

Created by The Bushranger (talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 28 December 2017 (UTC).

All new enough. All long enough. All paragraphs in all articles cited. Everything well-cited, but AGF as largely cited from offline sources. Earwig and spot checking found no close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations or plagiarism. NPOV. Image suitably licensed for main page. Both hooks check out with the cited sources. ALT0 is a bit dull, and might not be "interesting to a broad audience". I can't see anything more "interesting" than the bird theme, and it looks like ALT1 is about as good a hook as can be created. ALT1 could use the same image, with "(prototype illustrated)" added to the hook. Edwardx (talk) 11:53, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Comment: The Bushranger, is there no hope of 5x expanding Petrel or getting it to GA? --Usernameunique (talk) 12:07, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

@Usernameunique: I really, really wanted that, but a 5x expansion would need another 8738 characters, and while I've gotten good at writing verbosely that's a bit beyond even my powers of sesquipedalian loquaciousness. I gave serious thought to GA, but it seems a little short to submit at this point; but if you think it has a shot I could go ahead and submit it and See What Happens. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

The Bushranger, I'll give it a detailed look a little later (I'll try for today/tomorrow, but feel free to remind me if not), but shortness shouldn't be a concern as long as it's comprehensive. The lead should be more than two sentences, however. --Usernameunique (talk) 12:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Alright, I'll see what I can do when I haven't been up all night! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

And having gotten over my spate of Sick, AUM-N-2 Petrel is now at GAN. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:13, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

On hold pending the conclusion of the GA review and the possible inclusion of the Petrel article in the hook. @Ed!: Will you be able to conclude the GAr soon? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:23, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Not sure what do do on this one, the article's not far off but I'd still have to fail it to close. User:The Bushranger stopped editing a few weeks ago which seems out of the norm. —Ed!^(talk) 15:28, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Ed!: Thanks. Perhaps you can give him another week on hold and this nomination can perfectly well wait for a bit, there's no rush. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:18, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
@Ed!: Sorry about that, I got kicked hard by real life and burnout. I'll try to get to it this week! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: it's been 3 weeks since your last post. Where are we holding with this nomination? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 00:04, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah and Ed!: Blurgh. I honestly do not know why but I have had no motivation for anything since mid-January. I will try to get the Petrel GA resolved by Saturday, and if I can't then we can go ahead and pass this without it... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:01, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Yoninah: Petrel's now GA. I've gone ahead and bolded it above, and will see about getting another QPQ tonight. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:15, 24 March 2018 (UTC)

Congrats on the GA and five article hook, The Bushranger. Donating this QPQ to complete the nomination. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:56, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

OK, I'm here to promote this. I don't understand why Edwardx thinks the first hook is not interesting to a broad audience–it at least explains what Project Kingfisher is, as opposed to the vague ALT1. I also find the line drawing a bit dull. How about using the more colorful image in AUM-N-2 Petrel? Then you could have either:

A Petrel carried by a P2V Neptune aircraft

ALT0a: ... that a series of aerial torpedo-carrying missiles were developed for the US Navy under Project Kingfisher, including Petrel (pictured), Diver, Grebe, and Puffin?
ALT1a: ... that Petrels (example pictured), Divers, Grebes, and Puffins were all part of Project Kingfisher? Yoninah (talk) 20:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Yoninah, giving a tick to ALT0a and ALT1a, which don't introduce any new facts. Agree that the image is better, and it has an appropriate license. In terms of interest, "aerial torpedo-carrying missiles" is pretty catchy. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:45, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Belatedly, as the nom, thanks for the help @Usernameunique and Yoninah: and others. I don't know why I have full-on "meh" for just about everything lately, but...meh. Hopefully it'll clear. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:26, 5 April 2018 (UTC)