Template:Did you know nominations/Suli Lake

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:15, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Suli Lake, Dabiele Lake, Xiaobiele Lake

( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links:
)
The Qarhan Playa, with Suli & other Bieletan lakes in the west
The Qarhan Playa, with Suli & other Bieletan lakes in the west
  • ... that the Qarhan Playa's Bieletan Subbasin (pictured)—including the Suli, S. Suli, Dabiele, and Xiaobiele salt lakes—is China's largest source of brine lithium? [Source: "Lithium is also richly reserved in the brines of six salt lakes with a total of 15.2×10⁶ t in LiCl (Zhang, 2000), which accounts for about 80% of the total brine lithium found in China..." (p. 171); "Bieletan (BLT)... Lithium reserves of brine deposit in LiCl×10³ t... 7740" (p. 172); see also "the total lithium reserves in the brine deposit of the BLT exceeds the sum total of the reserves in the DT, XT and YLP" (p. 181) and, for the extent of the BLT subbasin and lakes included, see p. 177—Yu & al., "Geomorphic, Hydroclimatic, and Hydrothermal Controls on the Formation of Lithium Brine Deposits in the Qaidam Basin, Northern Tibetan Plateau, China" (PDF), Ore Geology Reviews, No. 50.]
  • Reviewed: Will do. Donald Dean Jackson, Hai-Quan Mao; Claude Batchelor
  • Comment:
    A) Kindly don't add other links to the hook. We're here to promote newly created/improved articles and people curious about other topics can click through to find them and maybe learn something about what we've been working on.
    B) I've included a link to the S. Suli Lake since it is a new article to get some eyeballs & improvement for but it is not formally part of this DYK review and wouldn't pass. It's still too short with some details drawn from the non-RS Baidu Baike (China's knockoff of Wikipedia) because—as far as Google knows—this lake has literally not been separately discussed in the English language before this Wikipedia article at all. The lake, its affluent river, and its position in the DBT subbasin, however, are (inter alia) visible in the US Army map here; in the satellite images in Yu & al.; and in the Qarhan Playa map on p. 2 of this pdf. We could remove it from the hook, but I don't think that's called for by the rules and it'd be less complete and get fewer potential editors over to see it and help improve it from other Chinese sources.
    C) Yu & al. don't explicitly call out the BLT using this hook's exact phrasing, but this is a hookier version of what they're saying. To show the math: 6 areas have 15.2×10⁶ t of LiCl which are ≈80% of the reserves; BLT's reserve makes up ≈51% of that and is thus larger than any of the other 5; all the remaining reserves ≈3.8×10⁶ and thus even if they were a single deposit (implicitly but not explicitly denied) they'd still be smaller than the BLT deposit.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 07:20, 15 August 2019 (UTC).

All articles are long enough and new enough (created August 9).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
Above you cite Zhang, pp. 171, 172 and 181, but each article has a Zheng source in foreign alphabet. What is what?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:49, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
LlywelynII-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:08, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
  • TonyTheTiger, nothing is preventing you from continuing with the rest of your review while you wait to hear back on this one issue. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:57, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
The articles are within policy in terms of being sourced to WP:RS with WP:ICs in a manner that is neutral and does not violate copyrights.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
The hook seems to be reasonably interesting and within policy (accurate, cited and neutral).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
QPQ done.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Image is PD.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:10, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
TonyTheTiger, I don't know why the nominator has not replied to your question about the sourcing of the hooks, but I thought I would try to work it out. The answer is that the three quotes above, from pages 171, 172 and 181, are not from "Zhang, 2000", whatever that is, but from Yu & al. (2013) [1], which is referenced in the three articles included in the hook. I have checked and found the quotes above on the page numbers given (one is in a table caption at the top of p. 172). Hope this helps, RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:16, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @TonyTheTiger and RebeccaGreen: LlywelynII hasn't been very active over the past two months, and other than a single edit on October 1 hasn't edited in almost three weeks. Considering the nomination has been open since August and they never responded here, it might be soon be time to mark the nomination for closure if this can't be finished soon. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:43, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Narutolovehinata5, why on earth would this be closed now? There's certainly a reasonable chance that—should the review ever be finished—it will in fact pass, in which case there's no need for any further participation on LlywelynII's part. Further, it would be difficult for TonyTheTiger to claim these as valid QPQ reviews if the nomination is closed before the reviews are completed (two such claims are currently on hold pending completion here). The review was started a month ago, and is still incomplete: no review-concluding icon has been given. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I meant to say that considering it's been a while since it was opened (and indeed this is one of the oldest remaining uncompleted nominations), this may need to be finished soon. In any case, it appears that the sourcing issue has been clarified by Rebecca, so this could be passed if there are no more remaining problems. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:19, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Promoted hook pulled from Prep by @Gatoclass: His edit summary said ""can't verify hook" Per WT:DYK from @RebeccaGreen: this nomination has been reopened for further discussion. Pinging nominator @LlywelynII: — Maile (talk) 18:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

From Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Prep_3_pulled_hooks on 24 October, here is more detail of what Gatoclass could not verify:
RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:18, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I was able to verify most of this hook after considerable difficulty, but most of the sources refer to the lake as Senie not Suli and I was unable to establish they are one and the same as the article states. Pinging the nominator LlywelynII.

As LlywelynII has been inactive since September (apart from a single edit on October 1), the Suli Lake nomination may have to continue without them. Pinging RebeccaGreen who assisted in one of LlywelynII's other nominations, as well as nomination reviewer TonyTheTiger for help. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 19:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
As a first look, I see that source 2, Yu et al (2001) says "A more detailed lithological, geochemical and pollen record of lake status changes in the basin is provided by a 101m-long core (Core CK2022) taken from the playa surface to the east of Sheli Lake and thus between Sheli Lake and Dabiele Lake (Huang et al.1980; Du and Kong et al., 1983)". The map in source 4, Du et al (2018) shows CK2022 between numbers 1 (Seni Lake) and 2 (Dabiele Lake). Romanisations of names in other scripts are always tricky, and in this case we first have a name in (a dialect of) the Mongolian language being represented in Chinese characters, per the Mandarin pronunciation of those characters, and then romanised .... Regarding "most of the sources refer to the lake as Senie not Suli", of the online sources in the Roman alphabet that we have in the article, the names are given as: Suli: Mao et al, Zheng; Sheli: Yu et al (2001); Seni(e): Du et al, Spencer et al, Yu et al (2013). So 3 sources give Seni(e), 2 give Suli, 1 gives Sheli - or, the second consonant is l in 3 sources and n in 3 sources. Apart from not being able to read Chinese, the Chinese sources would show the characters, but not the pronunciation of the characters, which would depend on which variety of Chinese it was being read in. I would be satisfied that Suli/Sheli/Seni(e) are the same lake - which version should be used as the title name in English Wikipedia could perhaps be discussed, but needn't affect this hook, I don't think. RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for that analysis Rebecca, I will recheck the nomination using that information a little later. With regard to the "most sources" comment, that was a misstatement, I was referring to the sources provided to verify the hook, not the sources in the article as a whole. Gatoclass (talk) 01:33, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Having re-checked the sources, I think there is enough information there to confirm the missing detail. Thank you for your assistance Rebecca. Gatoclass (talk) 11:20, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Suli_Lake&oldid=923854890"