- The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 15:27, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
C-Band All Sky Survey
Template:DYK nompage links
Created by Zivrapwej (talk). Nominated by Pigsonthewing (talk) at 18:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC).
- Possibly worth holding for an inauguration date. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:47, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Article is long enough, creation time and image license verified, sufficiently referenced, including the hook. I have an issue with the suitability of this article for a general audience, which I suspect will find already the very first sentence totally incomprehensible. Can a few more explanations be included: What is polarization, what does the resolution mean, what kind of sky map will be produced? The SKA media release is actually quite good at this; maybe some more info can come from this source. Alternatively, the introductory sentence(s) from the linked astrophysical phenomena could be incorporated here. Another minor concern: C-BASS cannot be pictured, this is the dish in the Southern hemisphere. --Pgallert (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've fixed the hook to refer to C-BASS South. Other points will need more expert input. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've slightly reworded the introduction to hopefully make it more accesible and also added an infobox with the CBASS logo. I think you're right that the article needs to be more accesible to a general audience. As this is my first article - I'm not quite sure how much detail I need to go into, especially considering how similar astronomical survey pages are quite technical! Over the next few days I should get chance to explain more of the terms in the article but would appreciate any advice on which bits need expanding! --Zivrapwej (talk) 12:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
- Congrats on your first article, it is a very respectable start for a new editor! You are right, other articles are equally technical, but the Did You Know process will lead to the article being linked from the Main Page for a few hours, that's why there are a few more requirements for it. --Pgallert (talk) 09:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- I've rewritten the introduction; it is custom to summarise the article content there. Still not entirely happy with the first sentence, but I understand too little about the subject to improve its accessibility---Is there an easy-to-understand reason why it measures at 5GHz? The logo is under copyright and still needs a fair use rationale, otherwise it may be deleted again. I think the terms 'WMAP Haze' and 'anomalous dust' (last sentence) still need to be explained, or if there is an article about them under some different name, linked. --Pgallert (talk) 09:21, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you for all your help! It's a fun process, I look forward to editing/adding more! The changes you have made massively improved the article - I'll have a think about improving the first sentence. We measure at 5GHz because it's a) not been done before and b) at this frequency most of the signal is coming from synchrotron radiation (emission from high energy electrons spiraling around magnetic fields in the galaxy) which is highly polarized and a major foreground drowning out the CMB signal. Is it going into too much detail to explain that in the intro? If so we probably need a different approach... as I say, I'll have a think. I don't think that the wmap haze has its own page, so at some point I'll add a little description of it (long term it probably deserves a page being a current hot topic in astrophysics!). I have just found anomalous dust - it is in an article called spinning dust, which it is now more commmonly known as, so I'll link to that.--Zivrapwej (talk) 09:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- Well, you've just explained it---I took the freedom to implement your explanation in the article. --Pgallert (talk) 15:34, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
- Checked plagiarism after the rewrite and found nothing. Hook is referenced, good to go. --Pgallert (talk) 15:34, 9 January 2014 (UTC)