Template:Did you know nominations/Integrated Visual Augmentation System

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 14:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Integrated Visual Augmentation System

(

)

Soldier dons IVAS 1.2 Prototype during user assessment.

... that the Integrated Visual Augmentation System can project mixed reality imagery to help train soldiers in combat? Source: "The system’s embedded training tool, the Squad Immersive Virtual Trainer, also provides Soldiers objective-based scenarios and battle drills through holographic and mixed-reality imagery, giving units the flexibility to train their squads with minimal resources." link: https://www.army.mil/article/268702/army_accepts_prototypes_of_the_most_advanced_version_of_ivas
- ALT1: ... that more than 50 Microsoft engineers opposed the development of the Integrated Visual Augmentation System, as they believed this made them war profiteers? Source: "Microsoft workers are calling on their employer to cancel a $480m contract to provide the US army with augmented reality (AR) headsets, saying they “do not want to become war profiteers”. ... More than 50 employees had signed the letter as of Friday afternoon, according to an employee." link: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/22/microsoft-protest-us-army-augmented-reality-headsets
- Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Liu1126 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Integrated Visual Augmentation System; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article meets all necessary criteria, ALT1 hook is well worded and appropriately sourced. No issues with image either, appropriately licensed, clear depiction of the item. grungaloo (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

The main hook uses a WP:PRIMARY source as a citation, coupled with the wording it makes it sound a bit promotional. ALT1 is also a bit off with WP:NPOV, but I think it could be fixed by rewording it to "some Microsoft engineers". The source indicates that it was a subset who felt this way and not all. QPQ is still outstanding too. Let me know what you think! grungaloo (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! I've changed ALT1 to use the specific number of opposing employees, which hopefully helps with the NPOV issue. WP:QPQ isn't required for first five noms; this is my first time at DYK, so I wanted to experience the process first before reviewing. Liu1126 (talk) 20:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Perfect, ALT1 looks great! And sorry for missing that QPQ, my bad! I'd say this is good to go, thanks! grungaloo (talk) 01:47, 15 February 2024 (UTC)