Template:Did you know nominations/UBAKUSAT

DYK toolbox
DYK check Reviewing guide WMFLabs Dup detector Earwig's Copyvio Detector QPQ check Character count Reviewers' template Disambig links External links Find sources (notability)

UBAKUSAT

• ( Back to T:TDYK
• Article history )

• ... that the UBAKUSAT satellite was built by Turkish students and will orbit the earth for six to twelve months? Source: [1] and [2]
  • ALT1:... that the Turkish satellite, UBAKUSAT, is only the second satellite built by students of Istanbul Technical University? [3] and [4]
  • ALT2:... that UBAKUSAT satellite, built by Turkish students, carries an experimental card to assess space radiation measuring technology? Source: [5] and [6]

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/United States Semiquincentennial

Created by Crosstemplejay (talk). Self-nominated at 11:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC).

• 16px New enough, long enough, written in neutral manner. The first hook appears in the article, and supported by citations. No copyvio issue found. However, I see it needs some work

• While well-cited, many of the citation only describes the website domain name, e.g. amsat-uk.org, dk3wn.info, www.astronautix.com. Please include the website's name and author (or publisher) so that readers can assess whether they're actually reliable sources.
• As it stands now the article is not very easy to understand. At the minimum, please

• Explain the satelite's purpose and the reason for its Notability in the lead (intro) paragraph,
• Explain the technical jargons such as "cubesat", "relative radiation data", and acryonyms such as LEO, PSLV, JAXA. Without understanding these jargons, it's hard for a general user to understand what the article is talking about. HaEr48 (talk) 18:35, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

• Template:Ping Thanks for your review. The jargons have been explained, since they were liked to articles they are acronyms of I thought it was ok. But since you found issues with it, I believe others will too so I have expanded on all of them. Please go through and offer the tick if you think it is alright. God bless. CrossTemple Jay 11:09, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

• Template:Re Thanks for update. Upon reviewing the expanded citations, I found that some of the sources you cited are self-published sources. According to WP:SELFPUBLISH, we should avoid such sources, unless we establish the author to be expert in the relevant fields. Can you take a look at my tags and check if they're written by established experts? Otherwise, those content need a different sources or need to be removed. Thanks. HaEr48 (talk) 05:32, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

• Template:Ping Thanks for another review. I have taken out all those self published sources. I have taken out content that I could not get alternative source to back. Please go through again. CrossTempleJay 12:24, 30 May 2018 (UTC)