Template:Did you know nominations/Brownsville, Brooklyn

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:58, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Brownsville, Brooklyn

(

)

~~... that Brownsville, one of New York City's poorest neighborhoods, used to generate $1.3 billion annually from businesses along just one of its streets?~~ Sources: "Brownsville, Brooklyn: Blacks, Jews, and the Changing Face of the Ghetto" page 31 (for the 1.303,000,000 billion part; CBD 16 health report page 6 (for poverty rate of 37%); Resurrecting Brownsville (The Nation article) (for there being twice as many poor as the citywide rate)
- ALT1:... that the New York City neighborhood of Brownsville has the highest concentration of public housing in the United States? Source

Reviewed: Michael Stevens (educator)
Comment: ~~QPQ pending~~ Now done

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk) and Neutrality (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 17:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC).

This is an article on my watchlist, that I have edited previously, and has grown immensely and improved before my eyes. The article was substantial before and has grown more than 5x within the proper timeline, and is within policy regarding neutrality, sourcing and paraphrasing issues. The original hook is within length, and while pages 30-240 don't appear in my view of the article I'd accept AGF; my issue is that, as worded, the number is inflation adjusted and it's unclear that the fact is clear. ALT1 is acceptable on all fronts. Epicgenius, looks great. Once QPQ has been met it's good to go. I'd appreciate any thoughts on the original hook. Alansohn (talk) 03:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

A tick should never be given until all criteria are met; since the QPQ has not been supplied, I am superseding the approval with a proper icon for this nomination's current condition. BlueMoonset (talk) 07:04, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

OK, looks like I need to do a QPQ. I was waiting for a review first for some reason, since I edit in short limited periods of time. I'll have the QPQ done within the next few days. Otherwise, I'd like ALT1 as the hook displayed, given Alansohn's concerns about Hook 1. epicgenius (talk) 14:52, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
BlueMoonset, you're absolutely correct about the tick; while I had assumed that all issues had been completed when I copied the tick mark, it is clear that the QPQ is still outstanding. Once Epicgenius takes care of the QPQ obligation, I will revisit and reevaluate. Alansohn (talk) 14:57, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

@Alansohn: I've done the QPQ now. epicgenius (talk) 18:19, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

with QPQ met, this nomination is ready to go. Sorry for the premature tick and for the delay in verifying. Alansohn (talk) 01:37, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

It's OK. It was my mistake to not do the QPQ first before nominating, which I did mainly because I didn't want to spend too much of my day working on a DYK nomination. So I split the DYK nom into two pieces, which, it turns out, didn't work out well. epicgenius - (talk) 18:15, 19 October 2016 (UTC)