Talk:Dot planimeter
Latest comment: 2 years ago by David Eppstein in topic Image caption
 | A fact from Dot planimeter appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 May 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination edit
- 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 SL93 (talk) 22:08, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that one can accurately estimate the area of irregular objects such as plant leaves using only a transparent sheet printed with a grid of dots? Source: Dolph 1977: "the dot planimeter yielded the best estimate of the population mean leaf area for the majority of species"
- Reviewed: 2008 Beijing Wushu Tournament
Created by David Eppstein (talk). Self-nominated at 21:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC).
- The article is new enough and long enough. It is neutral and cites many reliable sources. I like the mixture of pure math and applications. There are no copyvio concerns. Hook fact is accurate, cited and neutral. I find it interesting enough, and using a very application-oriented hook should make it more appealing to a wide audience than going for the pure math options. QPQ has been done. Good to go.
—Kusma (t·c) 23:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
- The article is new enough and long enough. It is neutral and cites many reliable sources. I like the mixture of pure math and applications. There are no copyvio concerns. Hook fact is accurate, cited and neutral. I find it interesting enough, and using a very application-oriented hook should make it more appealing to a wide audience than going for the pure math options. QPQ has been done. Good to go.
Image caption edit
In the caption for the first image on a page, it says " there are 69 interior dots.." and because of the number, I just wanna make sure that it wasn't vandalized and that it just happened to be that number. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 17:54, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- So count them. You know how to count, I assume. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)