- 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 SL93 (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Fen
- ... that fens, the sister to bogs, are an important source of chemical nutrient cycling and are dominated by mosses? Source: Keddy, P. A. (2010). Wetland Ecology: Principles and Conservation (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- ALT1:... that fens are fed by mineral-rich groundwater, while bogs are fed by mineral-poor precipitation? Source: The Biology of Peatlands
5× expanded by Ruite006 (talk). Nominated by Wahoobbs!! (talk) at 17:56, 20 March 2021 (UTC).
This article was not created or expanded 5x in the last seven days. On March 20, it went from 490 words to 1111 words, but this is not the 5x expansion required for a DYK. If you want to do a DYK, I'd recommend either writing another 1339 words (in the next six days) or nominating it at WP:GAN (since Good Articles can be nominated for DYK after their promotion). jp×g 22:22, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Note: Nominator is a WikiEd student editor for the Spring semester term at University of Minnesota - Twin_Cities. (course link) The course ends on May 4, 2021. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
- What counts at DYK is prose characters; prior to expansion by Ruite006, the article had 3061 prose characters, and it currently has 6934. It will need to be expanded to 15305 prose characters, requiring another 8371. Since this has been nominated, albeit by a classmate who hasn't yet contributed to the article, we can allow some extra time for it to be expanded by another 8371 prose characters, but it will require considerable work. Ruite006, do you think you'll be able to do that much expansion soon? I see you've been working on the article in your user area. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
- @BlueMoonset: Depends how much time I have. I just looked, and I have about 5300 characters excluding spaces (I think) mostly ready to move into the article. Given about a week more, I could probably manage another 3000. Ruite006 (talk) 05:49, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
The article currently has 19231 prose characters, well over the 15305 required to meet the 5x expansion requirement. New reviewer needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
General eligibility:
- New enough:
- See comment - Long enough:
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
The article was not expanded enough when first nominated, but it has since been expanded more than five-fold (~3,000 chars to >18,000), and I'm glad we're being a little flexible on the timing, since this is apparently part of a WikiEd assignment. No QPQ is needed. The coverage of the topic is appropriately neutral and encyclopedic. There's a potential plagiarism issue, but I think it's probably alright: it appears from this web page that Ohio's Ross County Park District has exactly the same language on signage in their parks as is found in the lead and elsewhere in this article. The wording in question appears to have been created by this edit in 2014, and my guess is that someone at RCPD borrowed some of Wikipedia's language for their sign; still, I thought it merited pointing out. The proposed hook is supported by the sources, but it's also a bit of a grab-bag of factoids; I'd prefer something more focused, maybe about how fens are minerotrophic, whereas bogs are ombrotrophic? Finally, the article's claims are broadly supported by inline citations to reliable sources, but there are a couple of paragraphs near the end that have "citation needed" tags; these either need to be supported or removed. Good work on the expansion! The article is tremendously improved! Bryan Rutherford (talk) 16:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Bryanrutherford0, thanks for the review! The majority of the content from the Vegetation section was either covered in the new additions, lacked citations, or wasn't about fen vegetation at all, so I removed it. I also rewrote the lead to better reflect the new content. The plagiarism you mentioned was in the lead, so it's gone now. As far as revising the hook, would something like "...that fens, which are distinct from swamps, marshes, and bogs, are habitat for rare and endangered species?" or "...that fens are fed by mineral-rich groundwater while bogs are fed by mineral-poor precipitation?" work? I'm open to suggestions. The citation for either of these would be The Biology of Peatlands textbook, which is cited in the article. I think it'd be good to emphasize that a fen is an actual ecosystem, not just a synonym for wetland. I didn't know any better until I started writing the article. Thanks! Ruite006 (talk) 21:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Bryanrutherford0, thank you for the review, I am the student who nominated this page initially for the did you know section per suggestion by the wiki articles exercises. The initial hook I used as I thought the hooks had to be general enough to grab the average viewer's attention, but I am happy to help change it to certainly be more interesting! Ruite006 and I are the students in charge of this article for our WikiProject and we'd love any critiques or suggestions you may have. There should be many more changes to the article before May 4th when the WikiProject class finishes. Wahoobbs!! (talk) 22:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
- Looks great! I prefer the hook ALT1 as more focused, but both are acceptable under the rules. There's certainly plenty more room to expand and improve the article, but it now meets the DYK standard and is hereby approved for DYK. Thanks for your responsiveness! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 15:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)