Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Riverton Lock

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Yoninah (talk) 18:35, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Riverton Lock

[edit]
(
)
Riverton Lock under construction November 8, 1895
Riverton Lock under construction November 8, 1895

Created by 860036ed (talk). Nominated by RHaworth (talk) at 13:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC).

  • Article is long enough and new enough. A few sections do merit inline citations, including the parts which form the hook. Additionally, it seems unclear to me which part of the paragraph sourced to [1] is actually dependent on that page. The hook itself is interesting but a bit too long. No QPQ needed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:10, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Tarted up a bit. By all means omit the second sentence. One of the things that puts newbies off Wikipedia is the use of undefined wikijargon. What is a QPQ? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Quid pro quo. In short, back when pterodactyls swooped across our pages anyone could post a DYK nomination and be done with it. This led to piles of noms and nobody reviewing them, resulting in a bloated nominations page but no hooks to actually run. So it was established that anyone who had nominated more than five of their own articles for DYK had to review one for every article of theirs that they submitted, which has both cut the page size (amazing, I know, but true) and meant that the people picking hooks for the Main Page actually have hooks they can choose from. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:09, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Great. Now [2] has stopped working completely. Thankfully [3] still works. Anyhow, there is still some material that has no source and [4] only discusses Goethals's own deeds, whereas The first major landing on the Tennessee River after leaving Paducah, Kentucky was Riverton in Colbert County, Alabama. Riverton was located on the East side of the junction of the Tennessee River and Bear Creek across Bear Creek from Eastport. Colbert and Bee Tree Shoals were immediately up river from Riverton and prevented major river traffic between Riverton and Florence, Alabama for 6 months of the dry season. In the late 1890's Muscle Shoals Canal was nearing completion which traversed the other major shoals above Florence, Alabama and Chattanooga, Tennessee. is unsourced. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:18, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Struck the hook since, at 241 characters, it was far beyond the maximum 200. Any new hook must end with a question mark per DYK rules. Since it seems the first sentence would be okay without the second, adding it below as ALT1:
  • ALT1: ... that at its completion Riverton Lock was the highest lift lock in the world with a lift of 26 feet (7.9 m)?
A combined hook could probably still be made with Goethals going from Riverton to the Panama Canal, if desired, without exceeding 200 characters. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

This article appears to have been written in May. The page was then blanked and recreated. Am I missing something here? It looks like it's old? Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:57, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Maury Markowitz, as you can see from this edit, the article was still in userspace as of November 7, so it didn't count as new until it ultimately moved to article space on November 8, the day it was nominated. It definitely meets the newness criteria. (The article was drafted in userspace last May, blanked by the author but had the blank reversed by the AfC reviewer while rejecting the request, and six months later proposed for speedy deletion because no further work was done on it. Instead of deleting it, RHaworth moved it to draft space, worked on it a bit, and then moved it to article space, at which point it officially became "new" for DYK purposes.) RHaworth, as nominator, we still need to know whether you will be supplying the missing sourcing, and whether you wish to propose another hook that is under 200 characters or go with my suggestion of ALT1. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:41, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oh dear, I have ventured into a different world! I spend most of my time on speedy deletions and I can tell you that if we had so many arcane rules and applied them as rigorously as you do at DYK, then half the deletions would never get done. Also, I call the act of simply striking the whole of my hook, newbie biting - in the context of DYK, I am a newbie. Wikipedia is a collaborative project - why could not BlueMoonset have split the hook for me and provided the necessary question marks?
I have spent long enough doing Google searches for references. If the ones I have provided are deemed insufficient, then the nomination must fail unless, perish the thought, another DYK volunteer wants to actually edit the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 00:20, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Rewrote the article a little, but someone else ought to check the references now. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:55, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Returning to basics, this article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline to a reliable source and either hook could be used. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. The image is interesting and in the public domain, but unclear and not worth using in my opinion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Riverton_Lock&oldid=880767991"