Template:Did you know nominations/Spectral G-index

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 19:44, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Spectral G-index[edit]

(
)

Source: "the G-Index is proposed because CCT is not a perfect measure of blue light... The G-index value is directly related to blue light content, and so should be specified when light pollution effects on wildlife or on star visibility are a concern.[1]

Created by Anotherdoon (talk). Self-nominated at 18:13, 12 February 2019 (UTC).

  • @Anotherdoon: New and long enough, QPQ done, Earwig detects no copyvios. Best practice is that references should be placed after the text they support; there are several paragraphs with no citation at the end. Otherwise looks within policy. Slight tweaks to hook. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 05:02, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for looking over the article. I think it's a bit odd to cite a source a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th time when the text is very clearly referring to the citation at the start of the paragraph. But that seems to be the preference, so I added the citations. I have dealt with all of the "citation needed" tags that were in the article, so hopefully it is ready to go now. Anotherdoon (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Regarding the hook, I understand the idea behind using the phrase color temperature instead of CCT, but I worry that way more people are familiar with the abbreviation CCT than with the phrase "color temperature". Would it be ok to have color temperature (CCT)? Anotherdoon (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I find it hard to believe that CCT is better known. I had to look it up. Color temperature is pretty self explanatory, and it is the name of the linked article. There are a couple of external links in the body of the article. We don't normally do that, it's against the Wikipedia:External links guideline, and as they are links to software, it could be construed as promotion. @John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): are you still handling this review? SpinningSpark 21:51, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I think they were originally in-line, but someone objected to that. I think it makes sense to include them, because they allow a reader to actually go ahead and calculate the value if they are so interested. Since two different calculators are linked, it doesn't seem (to me at least) like an endorsement of one of them.
  • One more thing, there are some unnecessary links in the hook that detract from the nominated hook. European Commission and Street light aren't really needed and could be unlinked. SpinningSpark 22:06, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Per MOS:ABBR, "an acronym should be written out in full the first time it is used on a page" unless "something is most commonly known by its acronym", for example NASA. In this case, CCT may be the technical term, but among laymen color temperature is much more well known. We could link directly to the section "correlated color temperature" instead if precision is necessary. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 01:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
  • The citation issues have been fixed, so this now satisfies all the DYK critera. I've tweaked the hook to mention and link directly to correlated color temperature. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 23:44, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Spectral_G-index&oldid=890667155"