Talk:Temagami River

Did you know nomination

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 Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Temagami River in Ontario, Canada, is an outstanding water route with 20 sets of whitewater rapids rated CI to CIII? Source: Ref. 6 (... protect outstanding recreational water routes / ... known for its concentration of novice to advanced white water paddling opportunities) and Ref. 3 (table of River Difficulty Rating)

• Reviewed: Sharri MacDonald

5x expanded by P199 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:46, 1 October 2021 (UTC).

• The prose is long enough and is 5xed within the determined period. No copyvio was observed. The hook is interesting but I need to know which of the sources support the portion regarding the rating? --Mhhossein ^talk 18:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

• Hi @Mhhossein: thanks for reviewing my DYK. The ratings come from Refence #3 - Hap Wilson's book Temagami canoe routes, page 23. Regards, - P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:46, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome P199. Ah, OK. Is "outstanding" some sort of designation? If so, can you present one more source making such a designation? --Mhhossein ^talk 02:33, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

See the small print after the hook above. The phrase "outstanding recreational water route" is taken from Ref. #6 (Crown Land Use Policy Atlas). This is not a designation but a descriptive term. Regards. P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:59, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@P199: Thanks, but please let me know if there is another RS making such a description. Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 06:17, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: The Crown Land Use Policy Atlas clearly passes as a RS. Why is another one needed? But if really necessary: Ref #5 (Temagami River Provincial Park Management Statement) also says that its "purpose ... is to protect outstanding recreational water routes". -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Well, "outstanding" qualifier needs more than one source, I believe. Good to go with the original hook. --Mhhossein ^talk 16:46, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Promoting the main hook to Prep 6 – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:13, 17 October 2021 (UTC)