Template:Did you know nominations/Let Nature Sing
<
Template:Did you know nominations
- 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 97198 (talk) 08:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Let Nature Sing
- ... that "UK Singles Chart? "Just before five o’clock, the presenter of The Official Chart Show, Scott Mills, interrupted the usual mix of pop, hip hop and Afrobeat to play a minute of birdsong. No synthesizers, no rap. Just the unadulterated sound of a nightingale, a blackbird, a woodpecker and a curlew. [...] It sold 23,500 CD singles and downloads last week and charted at number 18." link
- ALT1:... that "
- ALT2:... that "Let Nature Sing" , a single consisting of nothing but unedited bird song, reached number 1 in the UK Singles Sales Chart? "Single Sales" doesn't include streams. The singles sales chart for that week can be found here
Created by Smurrayinchester (talk). Self-nominated at 12:05, 26 July 2019 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- n some parts of the article are not cited or missing - addressed by nominator. - Neutral: - ? "tongue in cheek" would need to be reworded as it's not backed in the twitter post. - addressed by nominator.
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: - ? some exact wording that I suggest rewording like "shifting" - addressed by nominator.
Hook eligibility:
- Cited: - ? - main hook and alt2 is, alt1 is not
- Interesting:
Image eligibility:
- Freely licensed:
- Used in article: - NA
- Clear at 100px:
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: WP:WORDSTOWATCH with "despite" MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:55, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Article is new enough, long enough (2604 bytes), has hooks under 200 characters, and has QPQ done. There is also a picture of one of the creators of the track in the article and it's properly attributed from flickr. I prefer ALT1 as the main hook has "dsepite" which is
WP:EDITORIALIZING
. However ALT1 doesn't have a ref in the hook. I've also found a few issues as well in the article:
- The Guardian source by Welch doesn't mention Thomas was working on the RSPB Guide to Birdsong when he was recording the bird sounds.
- The citation is [4]. I've moved it make it clearer.
- The sentence has been changed I see, but it provides another issue. "decline in birds over the last 50 years" - so that'd be 1969. The Glimpse source says "since England last won the World Cup." As I didn't know when England last won the cup (1966 wiki says), and it doesn't provide an exact year, I think this is Original research. Also, the RPSB Guide part is confirmed, but has a ref issue that's hiding the sentence.
- The citation for "last 50 years" is cite [2].
- The citation for "last 50 years" is cite [2].
- The sentence has been changed I see, but it provides another issue. "decline in birds over the last 50 years" - so that'd be 1969. The Glimpse source says "since England last won the World Cup." As I didn't know when England last won the cup (1966 wiki says), and it doesn't provide an exact year, I think this is Original research. Also, the RPSB Guide part is confirmed, but has a ref issue that's hiding the sentence.
- The citation is [4]. I've moved it make it clearer.
- RSPB doesn't say "coherent track" - Perhaps drop "coherent"? minor point
- Done.
- Done.
- "the musicality of nature" is word for word and doesn't seem to be WP:LIMITED.
- I've simply put quotes around it - it was the topic of the event, so rephrasing wouldn't be right in this case (it would be like rephrasing the title of a book).
- I've simply put quotes around it - it was the topic of the event, so rephrasing wouldn't be right in this case (it would be like rephrasing the title of a book).
- The lead mentions the song was released "to raise awareness of threats to birds and its release was timed to coincide with International Dawn Chorus Day on 5 May 2019". However, the paragraphs below don't mention this part.
- Done.
- I don't see the International Dawn Chorus Day part though. Only the threat of birds in mentioned in the production part. However, there is a ref issue that's hiding this sentence, and I'm not sure which RPSB source it is.
- Oops, yes, it was hidden in the ref error. Fixed.
- Oops, yes, it was hidden in the ref error. Fixed.
- I don't see the International Dawn Chorus Day part though. Only the threat of birds in mentioned in the production part. However, there is a ref issue that's hiding this sentence, and I'm not sure which RPSB source it is.
- Done.
- In the featured birds part, there are some discrepancies with the rspb.org list. The list says snipe and swallow, not common snipe and barn swallow. Also, the article says 25 featured birds, but I only count 24.
- Yes, the RSPB says 25 birds in all its press releases, but it only lists 24 of them in the video. I can't spot the missing bird (and even if I did it would be OR), so unfortunately we just have to be a bit awkward there. Common snipe and barn swallow are snipe and swallow. I've changed them both to match the list.
- IF RPSB says 25, then a separate source would be needed that says 25, as the video and lists say 24. I've seen you've changed the bird names and dropped the exact number of birds.
- IF RPSB says 25, then a separate source would be needed that says 25, as the video and lists say 24. I've seen you've changed the bird names and dropped the exact number of birds.
- Yes, the RSPB says 25 birds in all its press releases, but it only lists 24 of them in the video. I can't spot the missing bird (and even if I did it would be OR), so unfortunately we just have to be a bit awkward there. Common snipe and barn swallow are snipe and swallow. I've changed them both to match the list.
- The song's #18 position at the UK Singles chart needs a ref in the chart performance section (not the weekly charts subsection).
- Done.
- In order for the citation to work, the artistid is needed (the citation is currently pointing to the search results).
- OK fixed
- OK fixed
- In order for the citation to work, the artistid is needed (the citation is currently pointing to the search results).
- Done.
- I'd recommend changing "shifting" in the chart performance part as it's an exact word in the OCC source and doesn't have limited ways to say it.
- Shift is standard record industry terminology, but I've changed it.
- Shift is standard record industry terminology, but I've changed it.
- Where did you find the label/length of the track?
- Now cited.
- Source looks good - it's currently giving a barelink so that'd need to be fixed.
- Fixed.
- Fixed.
- Source looks good - it's currently giving a barelink so that'd need to be fixed.
- The twitter post does say donk, but "tongue in cheek" might sound like the opinion of the editor, not backed in the source.
- Thanks for removing the tongue in cheek part.
- Thanks for removing the tongue in cheek part.
- Now cited.
- As for the hooks, the main hook and ALT2 I can't approve as it has the word "despite" per WP:WORDSTOWATCH. ALT1 doesn't have a cited source next to the hook.
Overall, the only issues are accuracy & missing info, a missed citation and two instances of word for word that i think should be rephrased.
--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:55, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333: OK, done! Smurrayinchester 09:51, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Smurrayinchester: Added comments and ticks --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Smurrayinchester: As all of the issues above were fixed, this is almost good to go! Thank you for fixing the issues quickly. :) However, there is a hook issue. (I originally checked this off, but realized there was hook issues. my apologies). MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333: Fixed Smurrayinchester 09:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
- @WP:EDITORIALIZING. Both would need rewriting. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:27, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333: I honestly don't think there is an editorizaling problem. The sources are clear that this is unusual. Nevertheless I have reworded. There is also no requirement that the citation here be one used in the article (I went for a different source just because it had the hook citation in a single sentence, rather than spread across several, making it easier to quote here). Nevertheless I have also changed these. Smurrayinchester 09:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- @
- @MrLinkinPark333: Fixed Smurrayinchester 09:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Smurrayinchester: As all of the issues above were fixed, this is almost good to go! Thank you for fixing the issues quickly. :) However, there is a hook issue. (I originally checked this off, but realized there was hook issues. my apologies). MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Smurrayinchester: Added comments and ticks --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
- @MrLinkinPark333: OK, done! Smurrayinchester 09:51, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
Main hook and ALT2. Thanks for making the changes despite the disagreement with the hooks. I'll keep them in mind for future reviews. Of the hooks, I prefer the main hook as it's the most interesting fact. I would pick ALT1 too, but since it's not in the article per rule #3a (first record ever to enter the UK Singles Chart top 20 part), I can't check it. Well done @Smurrayinchester:! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
