- 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) 18:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Bluefin-21 edit
- ... that the Bluefin-21 (pictured) is an underwater drone that is being used in search operations for the missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370?
- Reviewed: E. Gail de Planque
Created by Victor falk (talk), Rsrikanth05 (talk), Strike Eagle (talk). Nominated by Rsrikanth05 (talk) at 17:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC).
I am concerned that the bulk of the article is cited to primary sources. Source 1 (Naval Technology) reads like a press release, and I suspect it might be one. The second source is from Bluefin Robotics Corporation. Those two are the most heavily relied upon sources. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:49, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Sven, from what I understood, Naval Technology is pretty much a technology magazine. I agree that the writing seems to be from the POV of a marketing agency, but it seems to me like a regular magazine. As for the official Bluefin website, only the specifications have been taken from there. Should I reword it to say, according to the manufacturer? --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:23, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Naval Tech calls themselves as a reference site...so I think the POV can be taken for granted. It is a rather reliable source though. BTW, they use almost the same style of writing for other articles too (see 1 2 )....Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle sorties 12:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
I'll clear the sources then. This is new enough, long enough, within policy, the hook is appropriate, there is a QPQ, and an image is not under consideration. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- @User:Sven Manguard...oops didn't notice there was no image! Added one now...Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle sorties 07:57, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
- Naval Tech calls themselves as a reference site...so I think the POV can be taken for granted. It is a rather reliable source though. BTW, they use almost the same style of writing for other articles too (see 1 2 )....Cheers, ƬheStrikeΣagle sorties 12:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
- Still good with the image. I personally wouldn't run that image, per it not being reasonably clear looking at 100x100px, but it does meet the DYK requirements. Sven Manguard Wha? 12:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
