Template:Did you know nominations/Andheri railway station

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: rejected by SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 05:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Andheri railway station

(

)

~~... that the Andheri station is termed as "one of the busiest stations" in Mumbai, boarding 604,000 passengers daily?~~

ALT1:~~... that due to the increasing number of rooftop passengers, the coaches of Andheri station have been electrified?~~
Reviewed: Beer jam

Created/expanded by D'SuperHero (talk). Self-nominated at 08:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC).

General eligibility:

New enough: - It has not been expanded upto 5x
Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems: - Initial hook is better, because ALT1 doesn't looks like the actual fact. Electrification was not done because of rooftop travelers basically.

QPQ:
Overall: The hook looks outdated. The fact quoted dates back to June 2013. Ref: 1, 2 -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 18:04, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Comment: Karthikndr, ALT1 needs to be striked up plus the original hook is the sourced fact despite 2014 reports. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 05:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

D'SuperHero, ignoring the fact itself, the article has not been expanded 5x time recently. Which fails the DYK criteria itself. -- ♪Karthik♫ ♪Nadar♫ 12:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

This nomination had to be pulled from prep after it was given a cursory approval by an IP signing as a registered user (not valid), and then being promoted by the nominator (definitely not valid, as has been explained to the nominator before). Contrary to the reviewer, the article has been 5x expanded according to DYKcheck (the gold standard for measuring expansions)—it's actually a 9x expansion, since prior to January 16 the article had 418 prose characters, and today has 3747 prose characters, or a 9x expansion. (The increase that counts is prose characters, not total bytes.) However, the hook issues are real, such that I've had to strike both hooks: the original hook is from a 2013 article that talks about impending major increases in daily passengers due to an impending connection to the Metro, and the 604,000 figure is prior to that increase. Even more problematic is that the "one of the busiest stations" quote is talking about Ghatkopar station, not Andheri. The ALT1 hook, and the article, claim that the train roofs are being electrified; in fact, the entire section of the railway line was being converted from DC to AC, with the AC power lines at 25,000 volts, and therefore dangerous to rooftop riders who get too close to the power lines overhead. This nomination needs new ALT hooks, and the article needs fixing, since the article facts do not reflect the sources in these two instances, and perhaps others as well. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:25, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

BlueMoonset now if the hooks are "invalid or outdated" what measures should be taken by me now? SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 05:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

D'SuperHero, you need to create new, valid hooks, and you need to fix the article, which does not accurately reflect the information in the sources. (I noted some issues above.) And you need to do all this soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:55, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
ALT2 ~~...that the elevated auto-rickshaw terminal at the eastern zone of Andheri station measures a height of 60 metre and width of 34 metre?~~
@BlueMoonset: What about this hook mentioned above as it is fresh and cited one? SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 13:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

D'SuperHero, the ALT2 hook has way too many errors. First, the so-called terminal doesn't exist yet: nothing is built. Second, there is to be an elevated access road for auto-rickshaws to and from Nityanand Road, with a 60 metre long (not high) and 34 metre wide two-lane deck for loading/unloading commuters. Neither the hook nor the article correctly reflect what's in the sources. Finally, you haven't corrected any of the article errors I mentioned above two weeks ago, and there is no way this nomination could be promoted to the main page without all of these fixed, along with the newly introduced errors, and the article given a major copyedit. Under the circumstances, I think it is best if the nomination is closed as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)