- 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 22:02, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Mammoth Solar
- ... that the United States' largest planned solar plant is named for mastodon fossils in Indiana rather than its mammoth size? Source: https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/solar/mastodon-skulls-homemade-beer-and-the-largest-solar-project-in-america-a-mammoth-update/
Reywas92Talk 01:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC).
- I will review this in the coming days! WatkynBassett (talk) 17:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- The article was moved to main space on 11 July 2024 and nominated on 15 July 2024. It is thus eligible.
- The article is sourced, the quality of the sources could be better, but I think they are good enough for DYK. I did three spot checks and the references checked out.
- The article is written in a neutral and non-promotional tone.
- Earwig did not pick up anything noteworthy.
- QPQ done.
- Hook review: The hook is short enough and it is "hooky". I think the only issue I have with it is that Renewable Energy World does not seem to be a quality source. I thus added a further cite to The Guardian where this fact is also referenced ("A ripple of excitement was felt in nearby Fulton county in 1978 when the partial skeleton of a hulking mastodon was discovered in a drainage ditch, exquisitely preserved in peat. It was this 10,000-year-old specimen that would give the Mammoth project its name"). This article also lists the project as the largest in the US ("When proposals for the largest solar plant ever conceived for US soil started to gather pace [...]"
- Conclusion: I approve this nomination! Thank you for creating valuable free knowledge!)
WatkynBassett (talk) 20:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review! I've reverted your change though. I certainly trust the interview in that magazine, and the Smithsonian does in fact have a mammoth from Pulaski County https://www.si.edu/object/nmnhpaleobiology_3447796. While The Guardian cites a journal article that a mammoth was found in Fulton County, that must be a different one and the developer specifically references the museum's.
- Thanks for checking this again and I accept the text as it is now. If a future promoter questions the reliability of the source: The Guardian article can also be used to verify it as the text in the article is now unspecified again ("mastodon fossils that were unearthed in the region of the solar project"). Reticked . WatkynBassett (talk) 06:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Reywas92: given that we are specifically referencing the name of the plant, I think it would be best if it was mentioned in the hook. How would you like to do that? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:06, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- ...that the United States' largest planned solar project, Mammoth Solar, is named for mastodon fossils in Indiana rather than its mammoth size? Reywas92Talk 14:52, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Reywas92: given that we are specifically referencing the name of the plant, I think it would be best if it was mentioned in the hook. How would you like to do that? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:06, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
