Template:Did you know nominations/Diwata-1

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) 22:21, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Diwata-1

(

)

Diwata-1

~~... that Diwata-1 (pictured) is the first satellite to be designed and assembled by Filipinos?~~

ALT1:... that Diwata-1 (pictured) is the Philippines' first satellite to be developed solely by Filipinos?
ALT2:... that Diwata-1 (pictured) is the first Philippine-made satellite.?
Reviewed:Theeb (first review in DyK)

5x expanded by Hariboneagle927 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:21, 18 January 2016 (UTC).

: The article had been 1210 characters by 2 January, the day just before the expansion began, so the article had to be 6050 characters by 18 January when the nomination was done, while it was 4203 characters (less than what the 5x criteria determines). However, it got 5x by the end of 19 January (still within seven days period). So, the article has got 5x within the legal time. No copy-vio is detected and the first two results shown by the tool are apparently a reflection of the Wiki article. The hook is interesting and is in both the article and the source. By the way you should check if the text is in accordance with the sources. For example I can't see no mention of the satellite being launched by Nasa from California or Florida in this source. Mhhossein (talk) 14:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

The satellite's expected launch sites are cited by citation 11 just right after the sentence mentioning the launch sites. It is established that the satellite's launch site is in the US.

Also I am aware that the headlines of the citation varies when it comes to the launch site often confusing the launch month of the satellite either in March or April-but the body text of the articles suggests that the launch month of the satellite from rocket in the United States to the ISS is on March while from the ISS the satellite will be deployed from the Kibo module in April.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 03:51, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant this source in my previous comment which again has no mention of "California" and/or "Florida". You can simply fix it by reordering the citations.Mhhossein (talk) 06:51, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

fixed the citations concerned.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 10:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, but please reassure that the text is in accordance to the attributed citations totally. For example, in the 3rd paragraph of the 'Background', neither I can find any thing about "Typhoon Haiyan" in the ciataions immediately coming after the paragraph ([1] and [2]), nor the “small investment” phrase is found in [3]. Mhhossein (talk) 17:21, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Actually ([4] and [5]) does mention Typhoon Haiyan, locally known here in the Philippines as Typhoon Yolanda even in English media sources. The second source does not directly mention typhoon Haiyan but mentions "Yolanda Corridor" an area which was affected by the typhoon. Both sources asserts that it cost 56 million pesos for satellite imagery of the area. "Small investment" was actually mentioned by the source. Here is a direct citation:

He added that the cost of this project was just a “small investment,” noting that in 2013 when Supertyphoon “Yolanda” [Haiyan] devastated Eastern Visayas, the government had to pay around P56 million for a single satellite image showing areas affected by the typhoon.

Even though there were some citations that we rearranged primarily for clarity. I can attest that the text are true to the facts stated in the sources and there is no WP:OR. Thank you for suggestions which led to the improvement of the article. I have double checked all other citations in the article.Hariboneagle927 (talk)

: Good job, we can now move it forward! Mhhossein (talk) 19:46, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Can we get a hook that is more in line with the government's own statement of "DIWATA is the country’s first microsatellite designed, developed, and assembled by Filipino researchers and engineers"? Also, the word Philippines would be preferred to Filipino, as I presume the Philippines allows foreign nationals employment. I also think it would be wise to use this source as an inline citation alongside the inquirer.net for the hook's fact in the article. Jolly Ω Janner 05:56, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Actually the sources says that Filipino students developed the satellite (with guidance from Japanese experts). All 9 credited scientists and engineers are Filipino nationals. However the hook needs some clarification that the satellite is developed for their own country and not another country or private entity since their maybe some Filipinos involved in the development of foreign-commissioned satellites. Changed designed and assembled to just "developed" to be concise. Also this satellite is also not the first. Agila-1 and Agila-2 the Philippines prior satellites were designed and manufactured by foreigners.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 11:02, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
- It's an improvement, but I think noting that it was assembled by an all-Filipino team is important. I presume that Filipino people have been involved in satellite assemblies around the world. Jolly Ω Janner 22:41, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
  - Agree, Made some minor tweaks with the first proposed hook.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 04:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
    - ALT1 now follows the article and sources better. I've made adjustments to the wording of the hook without changing its meaning, which IMO are an improvement. I've also struck ALT2. Jolly Ω Janner 05:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)