Template:Did you know nominations/Lyndon Emsley
- 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 Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lyndon Emsley
[edit]... that chemist Lyndon Emsley led the scientific team that first used the world's largest NMR spectrometer?
ALT1:... that chemist Lyndon Emsley and his research team have used solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance on whole nematode worms to study their metabolism?- Reviewed: Paul I. Richards
- Comment: OK, stretching a little on making interesting hooks for someone in such a technical field :) Alexmar983, any other suggestions?
- Opabinia regalis I would say "that first used the world's largest NMR spectrometer" is the best concept (metabonomics is a secondary field for Lyndon, the name of the other French scientist should be inserted) but is too generic. A lot of people used "the world's largest" and "largest" is ambigous. So I would rewrite it as "led the team that installed the world's most powerful currently operating NMR spectrometer, eventually adding [, breaking the billion-hertz barrier.]"
Created by Alexmar983 (talk). Nominated by Opabinia regalis (talk) at 06:02, 11 January 2016 (UTC).
- Aha, that does fit! (Hooks are <180 characters.) Good idea Alexmar983!
- ALT2: ... that chemist Lyndon Emsley led the team that installed the world's most powerful currently operating NMR spectrometer, which breaks the billion-hertz barrier?
- Aha, that does fit! (Hooks are <180 characters.) Good idea Alexmar983!
New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. (I adjusted the sentence in the article, which was word-for-word with the source, using the language in the hook.) ALT2 hook ref verified and cited inline. QPQ done. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 19:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- To be honest Yoninah I would have never imaged that sentence as a possible critical paragraphing considering it is a very technical and short part. I am saying that because the closest text to a source in the article is/was IMHO in the career description (see the fist suorce). In this case my problem was that it is just a very rigid pseudo-list of academic positions, and I am not a native speaker and this one of the first test I read with this "style". If as a native speaker you can find better expressions for "he was appointed to a Professorship", "was the head of the" and "became a member of the Institut", please I am willing to learn.in any case I wasn't at least less original than the RSC website--Alexmar983 (talk) 22:39, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- I almost forgot: thanks!--Alexmar983 (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- I looked through a number of your sources that had high percentages on the Earwig Copyvio Detector, and that sentence about the spectrometer, technical as it was, was used in two of the sources. By itself, that wouldn't be a problem, but since you chose that fact for the hook, and rewrote it in the hook (changing "highest field" to "most powerful"), I figured it was okay to rewrite it in the article. If you wish to change it back, you could. Regarding the appointments, there really is only one way to say what positions he held, so those examples are not a problem. Yoninah (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- ah! it is because of the hook too. I didn't get that part. I don't wish to change anything, of course.--Alexmar983 (talk) 23:15, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- I looked through a number of your sources that had high percentages on the Earwig Copyvio Detector, and that sentence about the spectrometer, technical as it was, was used in two of the sources. By itself, that wouldn't be a problem, but since you chose that fact for the hook, and rewrote it in the hook (changing "highest field" to "most powerful"), I figured it was okay to rewrite it in the article. If you wish to change it back, you could. Regarding the appointments, there really is only one way to say what positions he held, so those examples are not a problem. Yoninah (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
