Template:Did you know nominations/The Skeptical Environmentalist

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: rejected by reviewer, closed by Narutolovehinata5 talk 12:32, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

The Skeptical Environmentalist

(

)

~~... that Mark Lynas once pied author Bjørn Lomborg because he disagreed with the views he had set out in The Skeptical Environmentalist?~~

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/oct/20/mark-lynas-green-movement

ALT1: ... that sales of The Skeptical Environmentalist quadrupled after a series of negative reviews in Scientific American were published? Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/423216a
ALT2: ... that E. O. Wilson said he regretted "the time wasted by scientists correcting the misinformation created" by The Skeptical Environmentalist? Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19438150903533730
ALT3: ... that The Skeptical Environmentalist was found to be scientifically dishonest by a Danish government agency? Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/08/world/environment-and-science-danes-rebuke-a-skeptic.html
Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ivančena

Improved to Good Article status by Arcahaeoindris (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 10 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Arcahaeoindris (talk) 22:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: A newly promoted GA which received an appropriate review during the GAN. Overall, everything looks good for ALT0, which I think is definitely the strongest option. I'd make a few tweaks to the wording, though, to make it more concise, define "pie" (since it's not that common as a verb), and remove the identity of the thrower (which doesn't add much as not too many readers will know who he is). That leaves us with ALT0a: ...that an environmentalist threw a pie in the face of the author of The Skeptical Environmentalist? If that works for you, this should be good to go. Sdkb ^talk 01:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, @Sdkb:! Your proposed alt is fine with me :) Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm getting WP:false balance vibes from ALT0. Views sounds like an opinion, rather than misinformation. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

ALT0a presumably resolves that, though, Femke. I'll cross out ALT0 to make it clearer. Sdkb ^talk 17:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

yeah, you're right, should have noticed that, sorry. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

After no response to my notice on WT:DYK, I have pulled the hook due to unsourced content. Z1720 (talk) 00:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

The creator of this nom has not edited since May 10. Unless someone adopts this nomination, I think this should be rejected as abandoned. Z1720 (talk) 00:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)