Template:Did you know nominations/Boro taxi
- The following discussion 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 Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:16, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Boro taxi
[edit]
- ...
that the new type of taxicabs of New York City called boro taxi (pictured) has "apple green" color?
Created by Z22 (talk). Self nominated at 09:23, 18 December 2013 (UTC).
Alt1 ... that the green taxis (pictured) of New York City are equipped with GPS to prevent them from picking up passengers in the yellow zone?— Maile (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Alt2 ... that the new "apple green" taxis (pictured) of New York City are equipped with GPS to prevent them from picking up passengers in the yellow zone? — Maile (talk) 15:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)- Alt3 ... that the Big Apple has "apple green" taxis (pictured)?
- For this alternative hook, should we make it like "... that the new "apple green" taxis ..."? This would make the hook more interesting to curious readers. It also reflects the facts that this type of taxis is new and the name of the color was carefully chosen to match its Big Apple nickname and to coincide with city's green efforts. On another note, I recently added more words and references to the article to make sure that the alternative hook is directly backed up by statements and inline citations in the article. Z22 (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- I made your suggestion Alt 2, and threw in Alt 3 just for fun (it was too much to resist). I also added the other image of the taxi, as an alternative choice. — Maile (talk) 23:21, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Biggest problem with the article is it fails the new criteria, it was not moved from sandbox → mainspace. It was created randomly. This is probably criteria it would pass but it does not. Soham 06:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I think it is new enough - article was created on 18 December and was nominated on the same day so passes the criteria. --Bcp67 (talk) 10:58, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I'm new to the DYK process, but my understanding of the rules is that the rule 1d on moving (or pasting) from sandbox space to main space is just and exception to tell us to start counting the five days from the date the article moved into the main space. It does not mean that all eligible articles must use this method. Creating a brand new article from scratch in the main space and nominating it within five days would pass the criteria on 'new' as well (as described in the base rule which said, "... articles that, within the past five days, have been either: created ..."). This article was nominated the same day of its creation so it should be new enough, right? Z22 (talk) 13:25, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Date, length and hook all OK. I think ALT3 is the best, so I've struck the rest. Picture licence fine. Good to go. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:10, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
