Template talk:Did you know nominations/Intel 5-level paging
I'm not clear on the entire DYK process. How do I raise an objection? There is no way this is of interest to a general audience. Jeh (talk) 22:02, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Jeh! The DYK process mainly celebrates new and vastly improved articles by giving them their few hours of glory on the main page. General interest is not a requirement. --Pgallert (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- You are mistaken. Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Did_you_know#Eligibility_criteria , item 3a. "Cited hook [...] The hook should include a definite fact that is mentioned in the article and interesting to a broad audience."
- And then there's the little point that what the hook claims is not true. Intel isn't "planning" any such thing. They merely fpublished a white paper about one possible way of supporting 57-bit virtual address space. There is no evidence offered of any plan to implement that or any other method. Jeh (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeh: I know this rule. At the same time I know of not a single example of an article that failed at DYK due to lack of broad interest. Just in the last few days we got a minor railway station, a group of women guarding a bridge 250 years ago, an award ceremony for 2017 Mexican films, and a very rare heart defect. In fact, you could kill almost every current nomination with a strict reading of that rule. Besides, it is the hook that needs to be interesting, and this is what we're trying to achieve here. It still needs to be correct, though. --Pgallert (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- "I know this rule." I don't think you do! This nomination does not merely show lack of broad interest. This is narrow like a thousandth of the divergence angle of a laser beam. People are familiar with and use railway stations and bridges, they watch films, and they all have hearts (at least, I cannot prove that any do not). I work in this field; I make a good part of my living by explaining this stuff, have been doing so for over twenty years; "I tell you three times" that the article will be practically unintelligible to a "broad audience" and by far the most common reaction to this DYK would be "uh, what? What's that about? Like pages in a book? Can I get these five minutes of my life back?" Correcting the hook to reflect the fact that Intel is not (so far as we know today) "planning" any such change, but has merely described out how they would do it if and when, will reduce the "broadness" of the interest even further.
- In any case, my objection as I have stated on the template will stand. The reviewer can decide. Jeh (talk) 16:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- Which would be me. But I'll ask for a third opinion just to be sure to follow accepted practice at DYK. Personally I find page walks more interesting than anything else up for nomination, that's why I was reviewing it in the first place. But yeah, I'm in IT, too. --Pgallert (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeh: I know this rule. At the same time I know of not a single example of an article that failed at DYK due to lack of broad interest. Just in the last few days we got a minor railway station, a group of women guarding a bridge 250 years ago, an award ceremony for 2017 Mexican films, and a very rare heart defect. In fact, you could kill almost every current nomination with a strict reading of that rule. Besides, it is the hook that needs to be interesting, and this is what we're trying to achieve here. It still needs to be correct, though. --Pgallert (talk) 15:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
- And then there's the little point that what the hook claims is not true. Intel isn't "planning" any such thing. They merely fpublished a white paper about one possible way of supporting 57-bit virtual address space. There is no evidence offered of any plan to implement that or any other method. Jeh (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)