- 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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Lemurs' Park edit
( )
- ... that one of the founders of Lemurs' Park near Antananarivo is the grandson of Pierre Boiteau, the Founding Director of the Tsimbazaza Zoo?
- Reviewed: Poverty in Cyprus
5x expanded by Maky (talk). Self nominated at 19:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC).
- Expanded 7x, well-sourced, etc. However, the hook doesn't seem too interesting to me. I'd prefer:
ALT1 ... that confiscated pet lemurs in Madagascar are taken to Lemurs' Park where they can be seen by visitors until being reintroduced to the wild?--Carabinieri (talk) 07:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm fine with either, though I'd prefer the first hook. The reason is that although the sources say that these former pets are being rehabilitated for reintroduction, I'm 99% certain that it's only their offspring that are being reintroduced. One source says this, but there is inconsistency, even on the Lemurs' Park website. – Maky « talk » 08:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- Then how about:
- ALT2 ... that confiscated pet lemurs in Madagascar are taken to Lemurs' Park where they can be seen by visitors? --Carabinieri (talk) 08:05, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, that kind of sounds bad. There are a lot of people in the animal rights camp that would get very upset over something like that. It may be true, but even conservation centers and sanctuaries use more convoluted ways to state things like that in order to make it more palatable. How about this (though I'm not striking the original hook because I think it's interesting):
- ALT3 ... that some confiscated pet lemurs in Madagascar are rehabilitated at Lemurs' Park? – Maky « talk » 17:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
- Then how about:
- DYK's goal isn't to promote the subject of articles, particularly not to phrase things in a convoluted way just to appease certain groups. And do you really think animal rights people can be fooled as easily as that?--Carabinieri (talk) 11:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- I wasn't really trying to promote the subject of the article. Just call it the old zoo keeper in me. Anyway, I still favor the original hook, but whatever is fine. – Maky « talk » 15:56, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Alright. Thanks for your patience. Like I said, the article itself looks good to me. I like ALT2 best, but the original hook and ALT3 also work.--Carabinieri (talk) 17:01, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- I wasn't really trying to promote the subject of the article. Just call it the old zoo keeper in me. Anyway, I still favor the original hook, but whatever is fine. – Maky « talk » 15:56, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm fine with either, though I'd prefer the first hook. The reason is that although the sources say that these former pets are being rehabilitated for reintroduction, I'm 99% certain that it's only their offspring that are being reintroduced. One source says this, but there is inconsistency, even on the Lemurs' Park website. – Maky « talk » 08:01, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
