Template:Did you know nominations/Environmental issues in Kolkata

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 97198 (talk) 07:36, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Environmental issues in Kolkata

(

)

~~... that in the WHO ranking of cities by air pollution, Kolkata ranks 25th among a list of 1100 cities?~~

Created by EditorMakingEdits (talk). Self nominated at 07:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC).

This article is new enough and long enough. The hook is appropriately sourced and I detected no policy issues. No QPQ review needed by this new DYK contributor. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Ranking 25th out of 1,100 actually sounds good ... until you read the article and source and find that it's called the "lung cancer capital of the world". Without trashing the city too much, could you come up with a more pertinent hook that conveys what the article is about? Yoninah (talk) 21:28, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

According to the article, it is "lung cancer capital of India", not "lung cancer capital of the world". I think the information regarding WHO ranking is more factual and less sensational. --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 03:05, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but it's not hooky. Yoninah (talk) 22:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

ALT1: ~~... that a 2003 study reported that 87% of water reservoirs in residential buildings in Kolkata, India, were contaminated?~~ Yoninah (talk) 19:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

It is ok. --EditorMakingEdits (talk) 02:40, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Since I wrote it, I can't approve it per DYK rules. New reviewer to sign off on ALT1, please. Yoninah (talk) 12:36, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Re: ALT1: The 'water reservoirs serving residential buildings' are not necessarily 'in' residential buildings. They can be outside or some distance away and feeding water to the buildings through pipes. So 'in' needs to be changed. --PFHLai (talk) 22:46, 8 November 2014 (UTC) Perhaps "...87% of the reservoirs providing water for residential use..."? --PFHLai (talk) 22:57, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out; I changed the wording in the article.
ALT2: ... that a 2003 study reported that 87% of reservoirs supplying water to residential buildings in Kolkata, India, were contaminated? Yoninah (talk) 23:20, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

for ALT2. Rest of the review per Cwmhiraeth at 12:02 on 1 November 2014 (UTC) above. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2014 (UTC)