- 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 SL93 (talk) 21:11, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Red Steer
- ... that in a violation of Rainbow Code rules, the Red Steer tail warning radar (pictured) was apparently named after a project manager? Source: Poole2
- Reviewed: HMS Surly (1806)
Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 14:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC).
- ? The source I can find mentions Jerry Steer but not that the project was named after him or that, if this had happened, then it would have broken rules. Am I missing the correct ref? Victuallers (talk) 23:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed, fixed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- Also, which picture do you prefer? Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Victuallers: Good to go? Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:20, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Its more than long enough, it was said to be named after Jerry Steer but the rainbow rules are offline so I cannot check. The only image here is free to use. It was only a day old when it was nommed. Cannot see any close paraphrasing and the hook is short enough and kind of interesting. I think its good to go. Thanks Maury (maybe you could add (pictured) to the hook? Victuallers (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@Maury Markowitz and Victuallers: apologies for late notice, but I have some concerns about this hook: (1) the claim looks WP:SYNTH to me; there are two sources, one saying it was named after Gerry Steer and the other giving rules for naming rainbow codes, but there is no source saying specifically that the naming of this was "a violation of Rainbow Code rules". Violation is a strong word for something that isn't directly cited. Plus we don't know for certain that it was a violation; it might be that "steer" was a word on the list of those used in rainbow codes, and it just happened to coincide with the name of the guy. (2) The word "apparently" is listed at MOS:DOUBT as a word to watch, and it's not clear why it's being used here - the sources state that the radar was definitely named after him. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- The rainbow code rules, as cited, state that they should be entirely random and have nothing to do with the project. This name has something to do with the project, and therefore violates the rules. It doesn't make a difference if it was named for him or not, even a coincidental match is against the rules, that was the entire point of using them. But if that's not enough, someone please feel free to make a new hook. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think this is just making work. As MM notes it doesnt matter if it was named after a dog called Steer AND that name was on the list. The important point was that he was called Steer. I was and remain happy with the hook. Just because "apparently" indicates doubt ..... does nt mean that there is any. Victuallers (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- I don't agree. Unless there's a source stating that the name was in violation, then this is a textbook violation of WP:SYNTH, which says "do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources". The claim in the hook *may* be correct, but it relies on assumptions which are not explicitly stated. For example, the source for the "rules" doesn't explicitly say that the name should be entirely unconnected with the project, it merely says it should not "reveal too much information". We also don't know whether the word "steer" was on the list of permitted words or not. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- Fair enough, please feel free to offer a new hook. Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- I don't agree. Unless there's a source stating that the name was in violation, then this is a textbook violation of WP:SYNTH, which says "do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources". The claim in the hook *may* be correct, but it relies on assumptions which are not explicitly stated. For example, the source for the "rules" doesn't explicitly say that the name should be entirely unconnected with the project, it merely says it should not "reveal too much information". We also don't know whether the word "steer" was on the list of permitted words or not. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- I think this is just making work. As MM notes it doesnt matter if it was named after a dog called Steer AND that name was on the list. The important point was that he was called Steer. I was and remain happy with the hook. Just because "apparently" indicates doubt ..... does nt mean that there is any. Victuallers (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- The rainbow code rules, as cited, state that they should be entirely random and have nothing to do with the project. This name has something to do with the project, and therefore violates the rules. It doesn't make a difference if it was named for him or not, even a coincidental match is against the rules, that was the entire point of using them. But if that's not enough, someone please feel free to make a new hook. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
@Maury Markowitz: OK then, how about something along the lines of:
- ALT1: ... that operators of the Mark 1 Red Steer tail warning radar (pictured) joked that the Soviets would not attempt to jam it as such attempts would not make it any harder to read?
- I agree, I quite like it. Let's go with that. I capitalized Mark. Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:53, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Maury Markowitz: Great, thanks. That means we just need someone to approve it - the rules say that since I proposed it, I unfortunately can't tick it off. @Victuallers: what's your opinion on this? Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 09:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
- It hasn't changed - good luck Victuallers (talk) 10:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Maury Markowitz: Great, thanks. That means we just need someone to approve it - the rules say that since I proposed it, I unfortunately can't tick it off. @Victuallers: what's your opinion on this? Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 09:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
New reviewer needed to check the latest hook. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:51, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- Approving ALT1, and otherwise relying on Victuallers review. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)