124:
206:
146:
By my understanding, not directly related to the WWII, but increased oil consumption and lack of conventional oil supply are definitely reasons behind of oil shale industry developments of this period. A 80 ton per day plant is not significant for the oil industry in general, but compared with other
130:
Regardless, the hook would pass. But there are prose issues in the article that need to be dealt with before this passes. In the first line of the first paragraph after the lead, English use would prefer "resources" to resource. The second sentence of the second paragraph reads "to consists" instead
127:
Date, length, and citations ok. No neutrality tags or plagiarism issues. The hook is supported by its source, but I wonder if we can't find something more unique to grab people's attention. Is a 80 ton per day plant special in some way? I see the dates line up exactly with WWII in Europe. Was this
131:
of "to consist." Under "Recent activities" it should either read "A new strategy was" or "New strategies were," not "New strategy was". These kinds of errors run throughout. Get a copyedit, and I see no reason this shouldn't pass.
191:
233:
36:
178:
I did a copyedit - not creating brilliant prose but I think it's mostly OK now. Might I suggest this alt hook: That over 53 billion
17:
44:
73:
47:), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
40:
190:? Billions of barrels of oil is catchy, no? (Or maybe "over 50 billion", since this source, used in the article
193:, reads "Morocco’s total in place oil shale reserves are estimated at between 50 and 55 billion barrels.")
187:
170:
165:
90:
214:
198:
136:
147:
oil-shale operations of this time, it is worth of mentioning. I propose also ALT1 for the hook.
29:
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.
152:
108:
227:
210:
194:
179:
132:
123:
148:
104:
205:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
57:
183:
95:
78:
8:
111:). Self nom at 19:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
234:Passed DYK nominations from October 2011
94:was used to fuel an 80 tonnes per day
7:
24:
18:Template:Did you know nominations
204:
201:) 17:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
122:
217:) 18:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
164:: ... that T was a process for
155:) 10:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
139:) 05:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
1:
188:oil shale deposits in Morocco
60:18:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
88:... that in 1939–1945, the
45:Knowledge talk:Did you know
37:this nomination's talk page
250:
209:I like that alt hook too.
186:could be extracted from
128:reactor somehow related?
91:Tanger oil shale deposit
32:Please do not modify it.
41:the article's talk page
103:Created/expanded by
171:oil shale in Morocco
65:Oil shale in Morocco
112:
241:
208:
126:
102:
52:The result was:
34:
249:
248:
244:
243:
242:
240:
239:
238:
224:
223:
222:
129:
85:
83:
79:Article history
67:
61:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
247:
245:
237:
236:
226:
225:
221:
220:
219:
218:
166:extracting oil
159:
158:
157:
156:
141:
140:
120:
119:
118:
100:
99:
82:
81:
76:
74:Back to T:TDYK
70:
68:
66:
63:
50:
49:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
246:
235:
232:
231:
229:
216:
212:
207:
203:
202:
200:
196:
192:
189:
185:
181:
177:
176:
175:
173:
172:
167:
163:
154:
150:
145:
144:
143:
142:
138:
134:
125:
121:
117:
116:
115:
114:
113:
110:
106:
97:
93:
92:
87:
86:
80:
77:
75:
72:
71:
64:
62:
59:
55:
48:
46:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
169:
161:
160:
101:
98:pilot plant?
89:
53:
51:
31:
28:
184:shale oil
96:shale oil
228:Category
211:Norstrem
195:Novickas
133:Norstrem
54:promoted
180:barrels
149:Beagel
105:Beagel
168:from
58:Panyd
16:<
215:talk
199:talk
162:ALT1
153:talk
137:talk
109:talk
182:of
56:by
43:or
230::
174:.
69:(
39:,
213:(
197:(
151:(
135:(
107:(
84:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
