Template:Did you know nominations/Sonne (navigation)

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 —Bruce1ee^talk 11:58, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

(

)

... that the German Sonne radio navigation system proved so useful to the British during WWII that they provided spare parts to keep them running?

Created/expanded by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self nom at 21:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Interesting article, but the Wood source looks like a personal website, not a reliable source to me. Also, the article could use a little copyediting.--Carabinieri (talk) 13:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Refs changed. Fire away on the edits! Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:16, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Interesting article. I've been told you need a ref per para for DYK. Also having citations and bibliography sections separately seems confusing. Why not just provide full refs? Secretlondon (talk) 22:56, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe the "ref para" you're referring to is the requirement to have an inline cite on the "hook" statement. In this case, Blanchard's article on Console directly refers to Fennessey's support of Sonne, so that criterion is satisfied. As to the second issue about cites, the separate bib/cite areas is the way it's been done for years. Generally he rule of thumb is that if a particular source is used several times in the body, you separate it out and use SFN's to refer to it. It makes it much easier to read if the source is large and you refer to multiple pages. See the Gee article as an example of why this works so well. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

What Secretlondon is saying is that it's currently unclear what sources several of the paragraphs are based on because they don't contain any footnotes. Specifically, I mean the paragraphs starting with "Another solution to the radio", "Beam systems like Radio Range", "Early in the war the", "It is a general rule". If those paragraphs are based on the sources cited in the paragraphs that follow them, then it might be useful to add footnotes indicating that.--Carabinieri (talk) 18:43, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

It's an interesting article and hook, and I don't doubt its accuracy, but I see some serious issues remaining. The main source (Blanchard 1991) is cited as if it were a journal article, but it's apparent that the actual source is a personally maintained website that is largely based on the journal article. (The actual journal article title is "Air Navigation Systems Chapter 4. Hyperbolic Airborne Radio Navigation Aids – A Navigator's View of their History and Development" and the full reference is Journal of Navigation (1991), 44 (3): pp 285-315, doi:10.1017/S0373463300010092.) Unfortunately, the website does not appear to qualify as a reliable source, which is necessary for the hook fact in a DYK hook. Additionally, while the article as a whole is now reasonably well supplied with footnotes, the background/introduction paragraphs at the beginnings of sections like "Sonne" and "Deployment" still lack footnotes. These are needed per DYK supplementary rule D2. --Orlady (talk) 19:19, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Blanchard is a journal reference, the Journal was good enough to send me a copy of it. The personal website in question simply took the time to do a little basic formatting and turn it into HTML. The text and graphics are verbatim from the original. Maury Markowitz (talk) 17:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. It's good to know that that webpage is verbatim from the original. My concern is that (1) the article does not document the relationship between the linked URL and the journal article and (2) the journal table of contents for the original publication has a completely different title for the article. In the principle of SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT, the reference needs to provide more complete documentation of the source. --Orlady (talk) 20:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Surely the URL argument holds true for references into Google Books as well? Maury Markowitz (talk) 10:25, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

There's a problem with the current arrangement. The person who clicks on the link in your reference citation reaches a website that looks nothing like the source identified in the reference citation. If you actually read a paper copy of the journal article, and this page is a complete transcript of the journal article, the citation needs to be revised to (1) identify the journal article as the source and (2) identify this website as having republished the text of the article. If (as I believe may be the case, indicated by the fact that the same website cites it on multiple pages), the website provides only a partial transcript of the article, the reference citation should identify the webpage as an excerpt and list the webpage title as "Sonne/Consol". For example, the reference might read something like this:

W. F. Blanchard (1991), "Air Navigation Systems Chapter 4. Hyperbolic Airborne Radio Navigation Aids – A Navigator's View of their History and Development", The Journal of Navigation, Vol 44, No. 3; Sept 1991. Excerpt reproduced as Sonne/Consol by Jerry Proc, Hyperbolic Radio Navigation Systems website. --Orlady (talk) 11:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok I get it. Fixed! Maury Markowitz (talk) 10:32, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Good! --Orlady (talk) 07:50, 21 June 2012 (UTC)