- 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 Yoninah (talk) 22:08, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Windscale Piles edit
The Windscale Piles (centre and right) in 1985
- ... that the chimneys of the Windscale Piles (pictured) were topped with "Cockcroft's Follies"? Source: "Because they were last-minute additions, the filters were placed atop the two 360ft (110m) tall chimneys rather than at the base. They were roundly criticised by the engineers building the nuclear facility. Engineers, who had been told by the government to make the UK a nuclear power by 1952, nicknamed the filters Cockcroft's Follies, mocking them as an expensive piece of pointless delay." (and [1])
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Nucleus, the Nuclear and Caithness Archives
- Comment: Formerly a redirect. This version moved to mainspace on 17 July 2018.
Created by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:29, 19 July 2018 (UTC).
Article is new, although I see it was moved to mainspace on the day before on 16 July 2018. The sections "Background" and "Product" are derived from text at Windscale fire, but even not counting those sections the article is long enough. Article is within policy and QPQ has been completed. However, the hooks doesn't seem very interesting as much as it is confusing to the average reader. Perhaps it could try to explain the purpose of the "Cockcroft's Folly". Also, why is "Cockcroft's Folly" singular instead of plural like in the source? FallingGravity 22:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
Alt1: ... that although the filters added to the chimneys of the Windscale Piles (pictured) were mocked as "Cockcroft's Follies", they prevented what might have been a disastrous radioactive accident? Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:58, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I've tried to properly format this hook. Each fact from the hook needs to be in the article, and I'm not seeing where it says that the name was a dismissal. The hook appears to be citing this BBC article, but the Wikipedia article doesn't fully support the hook. FallingGravity 17:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Almost ready as the hook and source appear to agree with each other. My only concern is minor: there are some typos in the article (such as "butwas" and some words lacking a space before a period). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:56, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- I mean that some words lacked a space before a period. I.e. "foo.Bar" instead of "foo. Bar". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:35, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, this should be good to know now as all criteria have been met. I actually think that the fact that cleanup works will last until at least 2040 despite beginning in the 1980s is pretty interesting and could itself work as hook, but that's just me. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:09, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
