Template:Did you know nominations/Western Block of North China Craton

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 Yoninah (talk) 12:05, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Western Block of North China Craton

(

)

... that the oldest part of the Western Block of North China Craton formed 2.7 billion years ago? Dong, X.J.; Xu, Z.Y.; Liu, Z.H.; Sha, Q. (2012). Discovery of 2.7 Ga granitic gneiss in the northern Daqingshan area, Inner Mongolia and its geological significance. Earth Sci. J. China Univ. Geosci. 37: 20–27

Reviewed: Ethnographic group

Moved to mainspace by HelenHYW (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 22:26, 29 November 2019 (UTC).

While I am leaning towards accepting this in AGF, it would be nice to have a clarification in the source itself whether it's in English, Chinese or another language—as well as a direct quote from the source here, as suggested by the rules. If this is provided, I think it should be accepted as an AGF nomination. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 21:57, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

The paper is linked here: http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTotal-DQKX2012S1005.htm . The language appears to be English. A quote from the abstract says: "The weighted average age (2 697±11 Ma) represents the diagenetic age of rock which is the oldest one of all rocks reported in the region.". I have no access to original paper, which hopefully explains "region". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:51, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

OK thanks, looks pretty good. Article is long enough, sourced, no problem with the dates. One last question though: the abstract also says that it's the oldest formation in the region. Shouldn't that be part of the hook to make it more interesting? —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 18:46, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

@HelenHYW: --evrik ^(talk) 07:21, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

No, the person to ping here is the nominator, Graeme Bartlett. I hope they'll be able to address the question raised. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:14, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

I am reluctant to say more and more as the hook is long enough already. And it is easily understood. If we added the name of the oldest formation, then "formation" would need to be explained as well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:09, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

OK though I think the hook is short enough to include a bit more information, it's interesting enough as it is to warrant a DYK. —Ynhockey ^(Talk) 13:44, 11 January 2020 (UTC)