A fact from Fish kick appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that although some sources have cited the fish kick as potentially the fastest way for humans to swim, it has not been widely used in competitive swimming?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwimmingWikipedia:WikiProject SwimmingTemplate:WikiProject Swimmingswimming articles
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.
Other problems: - The hook has issues. There are sources which seem to support it and it's interesting. But there's a couple of points to resolve. The first is the word "may" which seems to be a cop-out. Is it the fastest or isn't it? DYK hooks are supposed to state "established facts that are unlikely to change". The second point is that there seems to be an unstated assumption – that we're talking about competition swimming in a pool with specific rules which forbid underwater swimming. But what about sub-aqua or snorkelling, for example, where swimmers use equipment like flippers? Or deep diving, where the swimmers are going vertically rather than horizontally? They will go faster, won't they?
QPQ: Done.
Overall: It's a topic that would really benefit from a diagram or photo so it's a shame we don't have one yet. I've started looking.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the review,
Andrew. I'll try to respond in more depth shortly, but I don't see why 'may' in a hook is necessarily a problem-- on a search,
it has appeared in a not insubstantial number of hooks before. I wish there was a wealth of research that says it definitely is or isn't, but there doesn't seem to be a clear answer-- The only source that says it definitely is is Slate, which isn't the best source for claims like this--
Public Radio International opts for "some experts" saying it is. The hook could be rephrased to "is sometimes considered" or "has been cited as" or something similar, but I'm not convinced that's better.As you note there are a lot of variables but I don't think it's misleading to just say "for humans to swim"— I'd imagine the reader will assume that we are not talking about assisted (i.e. flippers) or modified (i.e. floating to the surface) swimming, just like (presumably) nobody would think the fastest way to run is biking. I, of course, may be completely wrong on this. Let me know what you think and I'll try to conduct a qpq shortly.
Eddie891TalkWork22:49, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the QPQ – I've updated the checklist. As for the hook, I hear what you say but still don't agree and so am not willing to pass this. To make progress, an ALT or another reviewer seems needed. Please feel free to relist as I have a DYK of my own which needs attention...
Andrew🐉(
talk)
21:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)reply
new reviewer needed. I see no problem with the proposed ALT. Of course, if it's just me who thinks the Hook is AOK, am more than happy to come up w a new one.
Eddie891TalkWork22:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Trying a possible ALT. How about ALT1... although some sources have cited the fish kick as potentially the fastest way for humans to swim, it has not been widely used in competitive swimming? I've tried to make it clear that the claim is only mentioned by some sources and is not a sure thing, though I don't know if that's enough to make it work.
Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew10:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Approving hook alt1 in good faith to the cited source behind a pay wall. The article is within policy and was nominated in time and was expanded 5x. This can be promoted.
4meter4 (
talk)
20:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)reply
A fact from Fish kick appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 May 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that although some sources have cited the fish kick as potentially the fastest way for humans to swim, it has not been widely used in competitive swimming?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Swimming, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Swimming on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwimmingWikipedia:WikiProject SwimmingTemplate:WikiProject Swimmingswimming articles
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.
Other problems: - The hook has issues. There are sources which seem to support it and it's interesting. But there's a couple of points to resolve. The first is the word "may" which seems to be a cop-out. Is it the fastest or isn't it? DYK hooks are supposed to state "established facts that are unlikely to change". The second point is that there seems to be an unstated assumption – that we're talking about competition swimming in a pool with specific rules which forbid underwater swimming. But what about sub-aqua or snorkelling, for example, where swimmers use equipment like flippers? Or deep diving, where the swimmers are going vertically rather than horizontally? They will go faster, won't they?
QPQ: Done.
Overall: It's a topic that would really benefit from a diagram or photo so it's a shame we don't have one yet. I've started looking.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the review,
Andrew. I'll try to respond in more depth shortly, but I don't see why 'may' in a hook is necessarily a problem-- on a search,
it has appeared in a not insubstantial number of hooks before. I wish there was a wealth of research that says it definitely is or isn't, but there doesn't seem to be a clear answer-- The only source that says it definitely is is Slate, which isn't the best source for claims like this--
Public Radio International opts for "some experts" saying it is. The hook could be rephrased to "is sometimes considered" or "has been cited as" or something similar, but I'm not convinced that's better.As you note there are a lot of variables but I don't think it's misleading to just say "for humans to swim"— I'd imagine the reader will assume that we are not talking about assisted (i.e. flippers) or modified (i.e. floating to the surface) swimming, just like (presumably) nobody would think the fastest way to run is biking. I, of course, may be completely wrong on this. Let me know what you think and I'll try to conduct a qpq shortly.
Eddie891TalkWork22:49, 22 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the QPQ – I've updated the checklist. As for the hook, I hear what you say but still don't agree and so am not willing to pass this. To make progress, an ALT or another reviewer seems needed. Please feel free to relist as I have a DYK of my own which needs attention...
Andrew🐉(
talk)
21:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)reply
new reviewer needed. I see no problem with the proposed ALT. Of course, if it's just me who thinks the Hook is AOK, am more than happy to come up w a new one.
Eddie891TalkWork22:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Trying a possible ALT. How about ALT1... although some sources have cited the fish kick as potentially the fastest way for humans to swim, it has not been widely used in competitive swimming? I've tried to make it clear that the claim is only mentioned by some sources and is not a sure thing, though I don't know if that's enough to make it work.
Narutolovehinata5tccsdnew10:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Approving hook alt1 in good faith to the cited source behind a pay wall. The article is within policy and was nominated in time and was expanded 5x. This can be promoted.
4meter4 (
talk)
20:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)reply