Template:Did you know nominations/Càrn Eige

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion 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: rejected by Allen3 talk 09:52, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues

DYK toolbox

Càrn Eige[edit]

(
)

Carn Eige

5x expanded by Gilderien (talk). Self nominated at 02:49, 1 January 2014 (UTC).

  • Comment - in what actual way is this a nomination? I'd assumed that a DYK nomination would actually have a hook, an article to link to and so on - this doesn't quite seem to qualify. --Bcp67 (talk) 14:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • When I nominated it I hadn't finished work on it, so I didn't suggest a hook because I might find something more interesting in my research. The article is Càrn Eige.--Gilderien Chat|Contributions 14:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • That's fair enough. You could have waited a little for the nomination if you'd wanted, with the expansion beginning on 1 January 2014 it could have been nominated up to 6 January. Any ideas on the hook yet? Maybe the mountain's remoteness or the fact that it is Britain's second-highest mountain by relative height? --Bcp67 (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Expansion and date ok. Article is a bit of a 'how-to-guide'. The sentence supporting the hook claim needs a reference directly after it. --Soman (talk) 04:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
  • I trimmed some guidebook-style content from the article, but I cannot approve the hook. I don't like the way the proposed hook obscures the fact that this mountain is second in topographic prominence and not in absolute height. Also, when I tried to verify the hook fact in the source cited (i.e., Dawson 1992), I had no luck. (When I searched separately on "Eige" and "1183" in the online text, I found confirmation of this Munro's elevation, but not of its relative height, and I didn't see indication of any table discussing that topic.) This is a 256-page book, so the citation for a specific fact needs a page number. I did find that http://munro-madness.com/hills/carn-eige supports the hook fact, but that's not the sort of reliable source we need for a DYK hook fact. If the hook fact can be verified via a reliable source, please reword the hook:
If that hook can't be verified satisfactorily, I suggest:
  • ALT2 ... that Càrn Eige (pictured) is the highest mountain in northern Scotland? --Orlady (talk) 06:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
  • I found an online version (which is a derivative work) which I believe to be reliable - [1] (page 27)? Is this acceptable? It is published on the rhb website as an extension to the original work.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 13:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks. That source (which is not yet cited in the article) does provide the basis for the statement that this mountain is second in topographic prominence. However, a citation to page 27 is hardly adequate. That's part of a table that spans pages 22 to 28; you are saying that a person could scan the entire table to verify that Càrn Eige is listed with the second largest "drop," which is the measure of topographic prominence. There are also lists on page 213 and 214 of the "highest twelve HuMPs" and the "ten most prominent HuMPs", with an indication that Wikipedia is the only place where the "most prominent" list was previously published. We can't expect Wikipedia readers to be able to figure all that out based solely on a reference to an entire 256-page book that did not include such lists. (Explaining this to me on a DYK nominations page does not substitute for citing sources in an article.)
If the article's lead section is going to list this and other of this mountain's superlatives (highest in northern Scotland, 12th highest in the British Isles, and second to Ben Nevis in topographic prominence), the rankings should not be based on a citation to a book of tables from which a reader might eventually be able to draw the same conclusion -- but only after immersing themselves in the esoteric argot of hillwalking/mountaineering hobbyists. Rather, the article needs to present and explain the data on which the ranking is based. The details of elevation and "drop" -- and the logic of measuring "drop" for this mountain -- need to be presented in the Topography section of the article (the article text should present the statistic for this mountain's drop -- an unsourced entry in the infobox is not sufficient -- and the infobox number differs by 1 m from the number given in the source you cited here), and there need to be reference citations to places where the data can be found without extreme effort by a reader who has access to those sources. The online book by Jackson that you directed me to here, as well as the various databases of Hills and Mountains of Britain and Ireland, would appear to be appropriate sources for the data. Further to the above, please don't toss the term "parent peak" into the description of Ben Nevis in the article lead -- save that information (which is part of that specialized hillwalking/mountaineering argot that I refer to here, not a term that people in general will associate with Ben Nevis) for the explanation of "drop" in the Topography section. --Orlady (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
It's been more than two weeks. Are you going to add citations to the article so this can pass? --Orlady (talk) 15:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I've been very busy recently. I'll see what I can do. I might add some more content if I get home tomorrow.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 19:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Another two weeks have passed, and this is still not resolved. Marking for closure as unsuccessful, though action may be taken at any time until someone rejects the nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:16, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Càrn_Eige&oldid=599561185"