Template:Did you know nominations/Cold pad batch
- 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) 02:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Cold pad batch
- ... that cold pad batch is a sustainable dyeing method that uses less water and energy? Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainable_Apparel/rloiBQAAQBAJhl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA147&printsec=frontcover
- ALT1: ... that cold pad batch is a cost-effective and environmentally friendly dyeing method that uses less water and energy than exhaust dyeing methods? Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainable_Apparel/rloiBQAAQBAJhl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA147&printsec=frontcover
- ALT2: ... that cold pad batch is a salt-free dyeing that is a more sustainable way of coloring the cloths? Source: https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainability_in_the_Textile_and_Appare/v1HaDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA50&printsec=frontcover
- ALT3: ...that cold pad batch is a salt-free dyeing method that consumes less water, steam, and energy than exhaust dyeing and creates less wastewater? Source:https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainability_in_the_Textile_and_Appare/v1HaDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA50&printsec=frontcover
- ALT4: that the dyeing industry might be able to use less water when dyeing cotton with reactive dyes by switching to cold pad batching? Source:https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainability_in_the_Textile_and_Appare/v1HaDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA50&printsec=frontcover
- ALT5: ... that the cold pad batch method could cut water consumption in dyeing cotton with reactive dyes in half? Source:https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainability_in_the_Textile_and_Appare/v1HaDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA50&printsec=frontcover
- ALT6: ... that the cold pad batch method halves the amount of water needed to dye cotton with reactive dyes? Source:https://www.google.co.in/books/edition/Sustainability_in_the_Textile_and_Appare/v1HaDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=cold+pad+batch&pg=PA50&printsec=frontcover
Created by RAJIVVASUDEV (talk). Self-nominated at 08:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC).
This nom ticks all the boxes. Article created less than a week ago. Long enough, in-line citations to scientific sources, no copyvio or inappropriate paraphrasing detected. Interesting hook. QPQ has been done. This is good to go. Topshelver (talk) 14:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)- @RAJIVVASUDEV and Topshelver:
Couple things about the hook. First, less water and energy than what? Seems like a bit of a vague comparison. Second, while the fact is certainly neat, I'm not sure it's very hooky – like, it's fairly interesting, but I'm not sure I read that and think "oh, that's enticing, I want to know more". theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Appreciate your point. Updated ALT1. Kindly see if it works. Thanks RV (talk) 08:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- @RV: That works for my first point, it provides good context, but I'm still not sure it's very hooky. I'll say that narratively, a good hook uses the encyclopedic format to tell part of a story – enough to get the reader interested in finishing the story by clicking through. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron: I have made the necessary changes. Please check if they suffice the purpose. Thanks RV (talk) 12:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Hi! Gentle reminder. Thanks RV (talk) 16:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, sorry! So swamped. These aren't terrible either, but I still don't see them as sufficiently "hooky". When you write a hook, think to yourself: "when a reader reads this, why do they want to know more?" Cliffhangers, oddballs, and seeming self-contradictions are great ways to get your readers to ask questions about the subject, for example. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 13:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Please check? Thanks RV (talk) 13:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- @RAJIVVASUDEV: now we're cooking! Unfortunately, I think that's a broader claim than the source is willing to make – not every fabric can be dyed with this method, so it can't halve the water output of the industry as a whole. Could the hook be adjusted? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 12:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Fixed that. Thanks RV (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- Added an ALT6? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Fixed that. Thanks RV (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- @RAJIVVASUDEV: now we're cooking! Unfortunately, I think that's a broader claim than the source is willing to make – not every fabric can be dyed with this method, so it can't halve the water output of the industry as a whole. Could the hook be adjusted? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 12:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Please check? Thanks RV (talk) 13:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, sorry! So swamped. These aren't terrible either, but I still don't see them as sufficiently "hooky". When you write a hook, think to yourself: "when a reader reads this, why do they want to know more?" Cliffhangers, oddballs, and seeming self-contradictions are great ways to get your readers to ask questions about the subject, for example. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 13:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- @RV: That works for my first point, it provides good context, but I'm still not sure it's very hooky. I'll say that narratively, a good hook uses the encyclopedic format to tell part of a story – enough to get the reader interested in finishing the story by clicking through. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- @theleekycauldron Appreciate your point. Updated ALT1. Kindly see if it works. Thanks RV (talk) 08:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
ALT6'll need review, then :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- @RAJIVVASUDEV: Looks like the statement made in ALT6 now needs to be clearly stated inside the article, with the appropriate citation. (Or am I missing something? If it's there and I'm missing it, please make it clearer somehow.) Cielquiparle (talk) 08:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Cielquiparle It is sorted. Thanks RV (talk) 11:39, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Ready to go. Strongly recommend using ALT6 hook per discussion above; fact is now also clearly stated and cited in the article. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
