Template:Did you know nominations/National Strategic Computing Initiative


 * 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) 04:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

National Strategic Computing Initiative

 * ... that the U. S. National Strategic Computing Initiative envisions new high-performance computing efforts in the Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Homeland Security?


 * Reviewed: Hypercycle (chemistry)

5x expanded by Antony-22 (talk). Self-nominated at 23:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC).


 * The hook is kind of dull. Any suggested alts? Neutralitytalk 04:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * ALT1: ... that the U. S. National Strategic Computing Initiative's Implementation Plan has not been released to the public to avoid preempting higher-level budgetary planning? Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 04:24, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. ALT1 is interesting, but the source to which it is cited is a video that has been taken down from the website. Do you have another source? QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 22:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, that's annoying. It was there when I checked a few days ago.  It doesn't seem to be mentioned in other sources, unfortunately.  What's the policy on dead links as sources, do they count as an AGF for an offline source?  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 01:52, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. ? Yoninah (talk) 21:01, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yoninah, Antony–22, I'm not sure either. Part of the consideration would be why the video was removed/withdrawn: if it was because parts of it were inaccurate or overtaken by events, then we don't want to use it. Since we can't know the reason, I'd be reluctant to include information based on it. Also, the article doesn't say that the plan has not been released at all, as the hook does, it says that it was not immediately released. All in all, I'd not go with it. Any other interesting hook possibilities? BlueMoonset (talk) 04:51, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The article states that the new program targets something in the 1000 petaflop range, which would make it amongst the world's fastest; Antony-22, surely there is a hook possibility in that? Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * ALT2: ... that a goal of the National Strategic Computing Initiative is to combine big data methods with supercomputing technology usually used for physical simulations?
 * ALT3: ... that U.S. Presidential Science Advisor John Holdren has expressed confidence that the National Strategic Computing Initiative will survive into the next administration?
 * I've expanded the article a bit more, hopefully the above hook is interesting enough. I clarified the "not immediately" part&mdash;the Implementation Plan still hasn't been released, although they keep saying they will.  I highly doubt the video was taken down because it was inaccurate, as it was a presentation by a government official involved in the initiative; probably someone wanted to limit the audience to those physically at the conference.  Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 03:14, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg ALT2/3 need review. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 22:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you for your work on this. Both ALT2 and ALT3 are fine, though ALT2 has a little more meat to it. Hook refs verified and cited inline. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 23:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)