Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Lem (satellite)

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:07, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Lem (satellite), Heweliusz (satellite)

[edit]
( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links:
)

A replica of Heweliusz, similar to Lem

  • ... that Lem started its stellar observations before Heweliusz (pictured)?

Created by LukaszKatlewa (talk). Self nominated at 09:31, 2 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Hi. I've only looked at the Lem article. It has a considerable amount of unsourced material and also needs copyediting.--Carabinieri (talk) 09:34, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I tried to source the informations in the article properly, could you indicate more precisely what should be sourced? Then I will try to source it better:)LukaszKatlewa (talk) 03:02, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

I was mainly refering to the paragraph to which you added the footnote. I still think the article needs to be copyedited, preferably by a native English speaker. I've also stumbled accross the following issues:
  • The press release by the University of Vienna cited in footnote 7 of the Lem article does not mention Lem or Heweliusz. The satellites it is discussing were manufactured in Austria and launched from India, so they are clearly Lem or Heweliusz.
  • I also couldn't find any information about Lem in the source cited in footnote 4. Could you help me out there?--Carabinieri (talk) 05:52, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Comment: I have struck two of the hooks and amended two others. None of the hooks are particulary interesting, and the nom should try to come up with some better alternatives. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 19:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Not sure this is much better, but...
  • ALT5 That 'Lem, Poland's first artificial satellite, images in blue-white, while Heweliusz (pictured), their second, images in red?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maury Markowitz (talk • contribs) 00:51, 4 November 2014‎ (UTC)
    • ClockC I'll take this. 23W 01:22, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
      • @Maury Markowitz: I've given the articles a copy edit and formatted some bare URL citations. They're new, long enough and within policy (no copyvios found), and the image is free and visible from a small size.
      The hooks are confusing though, as the Heweliusz article alternates between being Polish's second satellite and its third. If you can clarify that, then I propose a new hook:
      ALT6: ... that Poland's first artificial satellite Lem can see in blue, while Heweliusz, its [second/third], can see in red (pictured)?
      23W 03:16, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
      • The second/third needs fixing, but also - did anyone verify the blue/red? I don't read German, and that's the end-of-several-sentences-ref that may (but I cannot tell, nor trust, since the article doesn't ref all sentences) source this claim. Sigh. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
        • @Piotrus: I've machine translated the hook citation and it seems to be correct. Just need LukaszKatlewa to clarify the chronology. 23W 06:27, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
          • I added citations to the article. I propose a hook 6 precised:
            ALT6a: ... that Poland's first artificial scientific satellite Lem can see in blue, while Heweliusz, its second, can see in red (pictured)?

Or consider earlier mentioned, simplier: ALT4:... that Lem can see in blue while Heweliusz can see in red (pictured)?

In fact, (mentioned in both articles), the first Polish ever launched satellite was student made PW-Sat. But it is not classified as scientific.LukaszKatlewa (talk) 12:07, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

The blue and red passband filtering of Lem and Heweliusz are confirmed in English language sources, mostly Canadian, about the BRITE project of which the Polish satellites are important parts. See the BRITE project home page, for example. Combining LukaszKatlewa's simper ALT4 with Piotrus's precised ALT6a, I propose ALT6b. DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 17:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
@Doctree: @LukaszKatlewa: Would it be more correct to say the following?
@Doctree: In my opinion it wouldn't be more correct to say that:) However, in my opinion, any of ALT6a, b, c family are good.LukaszKatlewa (talk) 06:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
23W 07:05, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

New reviewer needed to do final review, choose best hook and tick or tickAGF. We've all become involved by suggesting hooks and/or copyediting the articles so we can't close or promote this nomination. Articles were new enough and nominated soon enough. Each article is long enough (over 2,500 characters each). Articles are neutral with in-line citations to reliable sources. Sources are Polish so maybe use tickAGF (but content accuracy is supported and verified by English-language sources for the Canadian parts of the project of which these satellites are a part). Later hooks are supported by in-line citations in the articles. Please strike through all ALTs except for the one you choose as most interesting and accurate. Thanks, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 18:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Of all the ALT6 family I think ALT6b is the most accurate. Looks like this one is finally good to go. Freikorp (talk) 12:03, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Lem_(satellite)&oldid=1017163060"