Template:Did you know nominations/Apollo 11 lunar sample display, Apollo 17 lunar sample display

Apollo 11 lunar sample display

 * ... that the only moon sample material gifted from NASA was presented in the form of wooden plaque displays of 50 mg dust soil samples in 1970 of the Apollo 11 lunar sample display  (Indiana display pictured) and 1.1 gram samples from lunar basalt 70017 in 1973 of the Apollo 17 lunar sample display  with both these plaques gifted of Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, Honduras, Ireland, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Romania, Spain, and Sweden lunar sample displays and with Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and West Virginia lunar sample displays?
 * Comment: Note that this is a 30-in-1 DYK
 * Reviewed Baal with Thunderbolt

Created/expanded by Doug Coldwell (talk), 7&6=thirteen (talk), JoannaSerah (talk). Nominated by Doug Coldwell (talk) at 15:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I've reviewed two articles:


 * Norway lunar sample displays
 * Spain lunar sample displays
 * Sweden lunar sample displays
 * Norway one was OK but only just 1500 chars of original text. Spanish one was Ok - impressed to find original description. But the Swedish one may be too short of original text. I did copyedit the text unique to the Swedish display - as some ideas appeared to be over described. I think it needs more information (c. 1300 chars of original text IMO). Victuallers (talk) 13:28, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reviews. We are working on the concerns you have for Sweden and Norway. Using this Javascript kit tool I get 1840 characters for the History section of Norway. However I'll see what I can do to expand Norway. We will expand Sweden and get back to you when done.--Doug Coldwell talk 15:34, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have expanded and copyedited the Sweden article. The History section is 1513 characters in this section alone using the Javascript kit tool above. Will that work? We will continue to work on expanding the Sweden and Norway articles. Could you give us an approval on these articles for now? Thanks.--Doug Coldwell talk 17:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I've reviewed the articles:
 * Romania lunar sample displays
 * Nicaraguan lunar sample displays
 * Sweden lunar sample displays

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:20, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The articles are new, long enough, neutral, well referenced and interesting. I didn't notice any copyright infringement. The hook is a bit longer (it lists more than 30 articles). Vejvančický (talk &#124; contribs) 09:52, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Just a quick fly by comment for the nominator. As far as I'm aware, the expectation is that one QPQ review will be conducted per nominated article, not nomination. That means there needs to be another 29 QPQ reviews conducted unless someone jumps in and corrects me. 62.25.109.197 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:55, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You mean 27? Three have been reviewed so far.

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:20, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed the articles:
 * North Carolina lunar sample displays Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Oregon lunar sample displays Symbol confirmed.svg
 * West Virginia lunar sample displays Symbol confirmed.svg
 * They are new, long enough on prose, neutral in tone, adequately referenced and interesting. No copyvio or plagiarism concerns.
 * Thanks for the ticks Berean.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I've grabbed three myself.
 * New York lunar sample displays
 * New Mexico lunar sample displays
 * New Jersey lunar sample displays
 * Only found one issue out of the three, which was with the New York article - there needs to be a citation to say that the location is unknown or else it counts as original research and should be removed. Miyagawa (talk) 21:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Reviews on these 3 articles. Citations have been provided. 1) CollectSpace does NOT have any record of its whereabouts and they are the main source for the whereabouts of all Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 displays. 2) I have been in contact with the New York State Museum and the only display they have is the Apollo 17 display (which they provided a picture of). I provided a copy of the email message from the Curator of Geology at the New York State Museum saying they had the Apollo 17 display only - therefore the Apollo 11 display  is not at the New York State Museum.  Had it been at the museum the Curator of the museum would have provided a picture of it also. She has no information on the Apollo 11 display. I researched the whereabouts of the Apollo 11 display and it is NOT made up information that nobody knows where its location is at the present time.--Doug Coldwell talk 23:26, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Just to make it clear, I wasn't accusing you of making anything up - it's just that without a citation it would have appear to some as being an original synthesis. Personally I'm happy with the way you've handled it, and until someone else says otherwise, consider the New York article to have been found fit and ready for DYK. Miyagawa (talk) 12:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't use much diplomacy in my wording. I know you were not accusing me of making anything up. I should have used different wording in my reply. I'll make sure that a citation is used in all articles in that instance. Thanks again for approving New York article as well as the articles for New Mexico and New Jersey. We are getting all 30 articles Reviewed 3 articles at a time.--Doug Coldwell talk 12:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm starting to review:
 * Honduras lunar sample displays Symbol confirmed.svg Size, date and refs all OK. Simon Burchell (talk) 09:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Brazil lunar sample displays Symbol confirmed.svg Size, date and refs all OK. Simon Burchell (talk) 09:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Apollo 17 lunar sample display Symbol confirmed.svg - cite 4 is a dead link, but it's an AP article available elsewhere, e.g. The Guardian. Simon Burchell (talk) 09:44, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Everything looks fine except the dead link, which I've changed to the Guardian page. I assume the dimensions and plaque text are taken from the photos. Simon Burchell (talk) 10:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Simon for approving Honduras, Brazil, and Apollo 17 lunar sample display articles. Thanks also for fixing the dead link.--Doug Coldwell talk 12:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * With some trepidation (since this is completely outside my areas of expertise) I'm going to try to help here. I'll take the Alaska, Arkansas, and California articles.  --Nlu (talk) 16:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Still reviewing Alaska article, but isn't a problem with this nomination that the hook is far longer than 200 characters? --Nlu (talk) 16:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It turns out a multiple article hook CAN BE longer than 200 characters. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 17:52, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Did you know/Supplementary guidelines reads "C3: A hook introducing more than one article is an exception to the hook length rule. If your hook introduces more than one article, you can do a basic calculation by subtracting the number of characters in the bolded character string for each additional new article beyond the first. After having done that, if the hook length is still 200 characters or fewer, it is probably an acceptable length. If it is over 200 characters after the subtractions, it may still be considered eligible if the hook is reasonably compact and readable, but such hooks will be considered on a case-by-case basis."


 * Alaska lunar sample displays looks OK to me.  I fixed the title on one of the links, fixed the description of one of the photos ("Aldrin" should be used rather than the informal "Buzz" in my opinion, although some thoughts on this would be appreciated).  On a related note, I am going to nominate the article about the lawsuit for deletion; I do not think it has enough independent notability.  --Nlu (talk) 16:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Arkansas lunar sample displays looks OK to me.  Fixed title on one of the links.  (Same one as I noted for Alaska.)  --Nlu (talk) 17:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * California lunar sample displays  text looks OK to me.  Fixed title on one of the links.  The problems I have are with the photos.  The sample display, the goodwill flag, and moon rock photos were asserted to be in the public domain because the copyrights have expired -- but that plainly cannot be the case, because even if the photo-takers had died the day after taking the photos, it's not been 70 years yet.  --Nlu (talk) 17:08, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Corrected license to PD as the copyright holder put all 3 pictures as No known copyright restrictions to Flickr.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC) Is it O.K. to get a "tick" now? Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * OK now to me. Can someone more familiar with Flickr's licensing policy also chime in?  --Nlu (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think the matter has to do with Flick's licensing policy, but Wikipedia's licensing policy. If you will notice on all 3 California article pictures it says: User:Flickr upload bot/upload-pd|date=20:25, 31 August 2012 (UTC)|reviewer=Doug Coldwell. That means Uploading is performed via a web interface that runs on the Toolserver. I uploaded them this way, which will NOT allow a license that is not approved by Wikipedia. Its foolproof - in other words, I can NOT upload a picture this way unless it is automatically approved by Wikipedia. Its guaranteed to have one of the correct licenses acceptable to Wikipedia - or it just won't upload. All 3 pictures were uploaded this way, therefore have the correct license acceptable to Wikipedia.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:09, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I just checked all the images used in that article, and can verify that they all have the proper licensing terms and are free images. Legoktm (talk) 22:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm looking at the first article, Lunar basalt 70017, (the 1.1 grams one) right now and technically it's long enough. However the two paragraphs of the "History" section contain the same info twice and the writing, in terms of arrangement of information is a bit awkward. Is there a way to combine these two paras, with Nixon and all that, into a single, smoothly flowing one? In terms of # of characters you got about 400 to spare so removing a redundant sentence or two shouldn't push it below the threshold.  Volunteer Marek   17:41, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Combined the two paragraphs in one. Tried to make smoother. Would you approve it now?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Some info on the fact that some of these rocks have been lost or stolen could also be added there.  Volunteer Marek   17:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Marek for pointing that out. I will go to work on smoothing out the Nixon info and all that, today.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, for DYK criteria it's fine now, though I still think you should add a bit (just a sentence or two) about the fact that some of the gifts have been lost or stolen.  Volunteer Marek   20:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * yes, agree with you. Will work on that tomorrow.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Here's the list of all the articles. If people could check off the ones that have been reviewed, those which are under review, and those which are yet to be reviewed, it'd make the process a bit clearer:


 * Apollo 11 lunar sample display  Symbol confirmed.svg Size, date, hook verified. NPOV. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * lunar basalt 70017 Symbol confirmed.svg Please add alt name (used here) to the lead, reference it as the alt name, and ping me again for a re-review. Date, size are fine. Hook changed to avoid unreferenced pipe alt name, my request no longer necessary --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  22:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Apollo 17 lunar sample display  - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Brazil - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Canada - Symbol confirmed.svg Size, date, hook verified. NPOV, no close paraphrase. Can't believe they lost the rocks, but glad that the Australian rocks are both safely here in Canberra! Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Cyprus - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Honduras - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Ireland - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Malta - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Netherlands - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Nicaragua - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Norway - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Romania - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Spain - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Sweden - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Alaska - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Arkansas - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * California - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Colorado - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Delaware - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Hawaii - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Illinois - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Missouri - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Nebraska - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * New Jersey - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * New Mexico - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * New York - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * North Carolina - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * Oregon - Symbol confirmed.svg
 * West Virginia - Symbol confirmed.svg

 Volunteer Marek  20:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg I would love to chip in with my own QPQ, but I have an unsettling feeling in the pit of my stomach about this entire case. To be fair, for every article submitted, there should be one article reviewed by the nominator according to our QPQ rules. Quid pro quo means a more-or-less equal exchange. There are 30 submissions here, and only one QPQ review, Baal with Thunderbolt stated at the top. How can this possibly work? Poeticbent  talk  22:26, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Answer to the QPQ query: As one of the contributors to this article, I understand the concern. I owe you 29 QPQs.  It will take me some time to work this off, but I think the system needs this effort in order to work.  Please be patient, as real life is intruding on my wikipediaing.  But I will get around to it, and keep you posted. If Doug Coldwell works on some of these, I'm sure he'll let us know, and it might reduce what I have to do. But I/we will get there, I promise. Thank you.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 22:34, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  22:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Will there be 30 DYKs or 1? I'm not sure how a 30-in-1 works...
 * It'd be one DYK, 1 hook, but technically 30 "credits" (if folks care about those).  Volunteer Marek   22:43, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Sooooo, do 29 more articles need to be reviewed since I have already done 1?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:47, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not trying to run the DYK people or the main page. I take no position on any of that.
 * All I am saying is I will treat this (for myself) as requiring 30 QPQs, whether it does or not.
 * I am not trying to set precedent or policy, and make no argument about it. Ii have no concerns in that regard. I think that as a matter of fairness and equity this should be done. And I will do it. That should end the concern about this particular DYK.
 * As to you Doug, you did the heavy lifting by creating these articles, so you can have a pass from me. Best regards and thank you all.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 22:50, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I notice Articles created/expanded on September 3 of hook Latin Grammy Award for Best Short Form Music Video, Jason Archer and Paul Beck, Agustín Alberdi, Gabriel Coss, Luis Miguel Leal, Israel Lugo, Jorge Rodríguez (director), Alejandro Santiago Ciena that there are 8 articles in 1 hook, HOWEVER only 1 article Reviewed. As far as I see there were no other requests for 7 other articles.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 23:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You may have just opened a can of worms with these; I don't know what else to say. Poeticbent  talk  23:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

My only point was that I am not interested in debating the policy issue. I suggest (respectfully to all) that policy issues are better addressed in forums that deal with policy only. I do not want to hold up these DYKs because of that debate, and I will take care of it here. With respect, ladies and gentlemen, please take your hypothetical debates elsewhere. The problem is solved here. You can establish, change or rearrange policies elsewhere and for the future. Please. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 00:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Illinois lunar sample displays is long enough, new enough and free from copyvio. Good to go. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Colorado lunar sample displays is fully sourced, new enough, free from copyvio and good to go. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Delaware lunar sample displays was new enough at time of the nomination, free from copyright problems, fully sourced, and is good to go. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Thine Antique Pen.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:40, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Malta and Netherlands are both long enough, new enough, and free from copyvio. Good to go on both. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 19:37, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Thine Antique Pen! We will all have to pitch in when you get your 60-in-1 DYK going.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:55, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm game to tackle some of these. But I don't understand the hook at all. It's difficult to follow, wordy, repetitive, and perhaps lacks commas. Would you consider using the term "moon rocks" instead of "moon sample material" so everyone can understand what you're saying? Here's an attempt at a rewrite:
 * ALT1: ... that Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, Honduras, Ireland, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Romania, Spain, and Sweden received wooden plaque displays of moon rocks and dust soil samples from the Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 missions, as did the states of Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and West Virginia? - Yoninah (talk) 20:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yoninah - we will reply shortly. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:55, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yoninah - We would consider Alt1 as long as the approving Editor understands that each of the Countries and States listed are really pertaining to the wooden plaque displays, NOT the Countries or States directly - and it is acceptable to the Editor or Administrator that finalizes this. The 4 QPQ donations would be appreciated.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yoninah - there are 3 articles missing in this to make it a 30-in-1 hook: Apollo 17 lunar sample display, and lunar basalt 70017. Can you put those in play also on your ALT hook. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:09, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this better?
 * ALT2: ... that samples of moon rock and lunar dust soil from the Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 missions were mounted on wooden plaque displays especially for Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, Honduras, Ireland, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Romania, Spain, and Sweden, as well as the states of Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and West Virginia?
 * I know the new articles about the Apollo 11 and 17 displays are not about the missions, but I can't think of another way to incorporate them in the hook. Any suggestions?
 * P.S. With all these displays, I'm surprised you're picturing the Indiana display, which isn't in this list.Yoninah (talk) 21:27, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * ALT3: ... that samples of moon rock and lunar dust soil from the Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 missions, mounted on wooden plaque displays especially for Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, Honduras, Ireland, Malta, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Norway, Romania, Spain, and Sweden, plus the states of Alaska, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii (pictured), Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, and West Virginia, were later reported missing by many of the recipients? Yoninah (talk) 21:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg Hawaii is new enough, long enough, well-referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in sources. However, the History section reads like it's backwards. First state what happened – e.g. "In 2009 the 'goodwill moon rocks' disappeared from the governor's office..." – and then tell us the outcome. This source may be helpful for this and other History sections in this series. Best, Yoninah (talk) 21:10, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointers. I'll go to work on that immediately.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg You did well. Hook ref verified and good to go. Yoninah (talk) 00:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Missouri is new enough, long enough, well-referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in sources. Hook ref verified and good to go. Yoninah (talk) 22:04, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Nebraska is new enough, long enough, well-referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in sources. Hook ref verified and good to go. Yoninah (talk) 22:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol confirmed.svg Cyprus is new enough, long enough, well-referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in sources. Hook ref verified and good to go. Yoninah (talk) 22:55, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Ireland - Symbol confirmed.svg Everything checks out. Buggie111 (talk) 23:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Ireland is new enough, long enough, well-referenced, no close paraphrasing seen in sources. However, I removed the cite on the very last paragraph because it came from a blog forum. Can you cite a WP:RS for this? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:29, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm working on this now.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:52, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Excellent. Everything checks out now. Yoninah (talk) 14:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

QPQ Reviews
Reviewed articles. They are:


 * Brookesia ambreensis
 * Brookesia bekolosy
 * Brookesia bonsi
 * Brookesia brygooi
 * Brookesia confidens
 * Brookesia exarmata
 * Brookesia griveaudi
 * Brookesia lambertoni
 * Brookesia lineata
 * Brookesia lolontany


 * Brookesia nasus
 * Brookesia therezieni
 * Brookesia thieli
 * Brookesia valerieae
 * Trioceros cristatus
 * The Conversion of Chaplain Cohen
 * Melissa Perrine
 * Mary Barber (natural historian)
 * Tjitra
 * Baal with Thunderbolt



7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 05:07, 13 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Also reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Trioceros cristatus. IOU 13 reviews as of now. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 16:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I am happy to contribute 4 QPQ's that I recently did and have not used against any other DYK nomination:
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Herbert Tarr (I reviewed 2 articles but only claimed Herbert Tarr, so my review of The Conversion of Chaplain Cohen is available for you)
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Andy Bor (I reviewed 2 articles but only claimed Andy Bor, so my review of Melissa Perrine is available for you)
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Barber (natural historian) (It's all yours)
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Tjitra (It's all yours)
 * Best, Yoninah (talk) 20:33, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Final wrap
I have been going through each page in this 30-in-1 nomination for minor wikifying and copyediting, and find everything in order. The hook facts – that the Apollo 11 and Apollo 17 lunar sample displays were given to each nation/state and were later reported missing by many of the recipients – appears in all the pages with appropriate sourcing. All the articles have been given a green light, and the nominators are 2/3 of the way towards completing the QPQ requirement, which, as we have seen from other posts on this page, was not demanded of other multi-hook nominations. With a good-faith nod to the nominators to complete the last 10 QPQs, I suggest that ALT3 is ready for the main page. Yoninah (talk) 14:33, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The last 10 will be done. It may take a week, but thy will be done.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 02:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Alfred Ransom <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 00:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)