Template:Did you know nominations/Northeast Syrtis


 * 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) 22:04, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Northeast Syrtis

 * ... that the Northeast Syrtis region on Mars once had flowing water, and has sulfate and carbonate minerals? https://marsnext.jpl.nasa.gov/documents/LandingSiteWorksheet_NESyrtis_final.pdf
 * Reviewed: Warren Angus Ferris
 * Comment: part of the Regional Geology course at HKU

Created by Justinbl (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 23:09, 19 November 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol possible vote.svg The page was moved to the mainspace, rather than created,, so it still qualifies. While it is definitely lengthy, I'd have to quote Neil Armstrong from Gemini 8 and say that we've got serious problems here. First of all, there's no source in your nomination to support the hook, which is already outdated since Jezero crater was chosen as the landing site of the Mars 2020 rover on Tuesday. In fact, you've left the default message up there, which is quite funny. The article itself leaves a vast amount of content uncited, too. An entire paragraph under the "Mesa unit" subheading lacks even a single citation, for example. Over a third of the citations that do exist in the article are missing date values. Outside of the DYK criteria I also want to personally note that the orphan issue needs to be fixed, along with the strange use of images, which are incredibly oversized and overpopulate the article, along with the many typos and incorrect spelling of words. It is my understanding that the article's original writer may not have English as a native and/or fluent language, and the article may need some editorial oversight. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 13:45, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Working on this. It is now copyedited, and deorphaned. I have now changed the hook, as you are right, it was out of date already. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:07, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Now each paragraph has a cite at least and date errors fixed, and shrunk the pics. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:38, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * any updates on this? Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 06:41, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg I was hoping for further updates to the article, but, so I guess the updates have stopped? Many of the citations are locked behind subscription and/or pay walls, and lack a quote using Cite journal's quote parameter, so it is impossible for people without subscriptions, like me, to verify them. As mentioned in my original reply, the issue of numerous passages lacking a citation is a problem that needs to be addressed. To explicitly point out some of them, they include, but are not limited to:
 * "From the composition aspect, it can be divided into four major units, from young to old [...]"
 * "The landing site's selection is the key part of this mission's success."
 * A vast majority of the first paragraph of the "Mesa unit" section
 * Everything past the first sentence in the "Megabreccia" section
 * "The detection of sulfate adds more complexity of Martian geologic history."
 * – PhilipTerryGraham (talk &middot;&#32;articles &middot;&#32;reviews) 10:20, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

New reviewer for second opinion needed, preferably those who have subscription to these sources. Vincent LUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 10:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg I do not have access to the paywalled sources, but taking this from a DYK perspective, the article is long enough and was new enough when nominated. The hook facts are sourced inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:30, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg The article looks fine except the sentence at the end - "The detection of sulfate adds more complexity of Martian geologic history." I can't tell if this is referenced anywhere in the article. SL93 (talk) 20:02, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Given what is said in the preceding sentences, it is a statement of the blindingly obvious. WP:WEATHERMAN springs to mind here. SpinningSpark 00:45, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Well, if editors want to ignore citing things, then whatever. I didn't realize that there was consensus to leave even obvious things uncited or that it was too difficult to source one sentence. SL93 (talk) 00:51, 27 January 2019 (UTC)