Template:Did you know nominations/Tibbetts Brook

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) 06:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Tibbetts Brook

(

)

... that ~~New York State's Tibbetts Brook, once used for drinking water, now empties into a sewage pipe to New York City?~~ Van Cortlandt Park: Tibbetts Brook, The Broadway Outfall Sewer, Borough of the Bronx, New York

ALT1:... that Tibbetts Brook's name means "smooth stones"? Van Cortlandt Park: Tibbetts Brook (technically it's the native name)
ALT2:... that Tibbetts Brook is proposed to drain into a railroad? Daylighting Tibbetts Brook (also technically, it's the railroad's right-of-way)

Reviewed: Al Zab

Created by Tdorante10 (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 01:45, 8 January 2017 (UTC).

- sufficient length, well-sourced (a few lines actually border on WP:OVERKILL), accurate hook (confirmed with a source cited within the article). The first hook is probably the best; the second hook suggest that the European name means 'smooth stones', which is false, and the third hook isn't as interesting as the first. Kayau (talk · contribs) 15:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

@Kayau: Thank you for the review. In light of a new addition by Tdorante10, I would like to propose another hook based on the first hook: epicgenius (talk) 16:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

ALT3:... ~~that New York State's Tibbetts Brook, once used for drinking water, now carries sewage from leaky sewers in Yonkers to a sewage pipe to New York City?~~ Same sources as ALT0, also Leaking Yonkers sewers polluting Bronx park

@Tdorante10: I'm not sure about this one, as it sounds like it's saying that its intended purpose is now carrying sewage from leaky sewers. What do you think? Kayau (talk · contribs) 17:05, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

@Kayau: If there was a better way to write it without being too long or wordy. The sewage from Yonkers is increasingly interesting as I do more research, but I still think the first hook is better and is a more defining characteristic of the brook itself. Tdorante10 (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

So I guess we should go with the original hook then. epicgenius (talk) 22:11, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

A QPQ review appears to be needed before this can move forward (QPQ Check results). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

@Northamerica1000: I have done the QPQ now. epicgenius (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC) (Also pinging Kayau. epicgenius (talk) 15:19, 26 January 2017 (UTC))

Alrighty, in that case, per the same reasons above. :) Kayau (talk · contribs) 14:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Coming to promote this I find the hook rather unsatisfactory. Does the drinking water bit come from "the local Lenape population utilized the brook for drinking water and fishing"? And a brook flowing into a sewer doesn't strike me as very interesting. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:09, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Yes. Actually, if that's unsatisfactory as well, we can merge this with Template:Did you know nominations/Van Cortlandt Park:

ALT6: ~~... that Van Cortlandt Park contains Tibbetts Brook, New York City's last freshwater marsh?~~

Pinging also Gerda Arendt. epicgenius (talk) 01:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

We could, but I wouldn't. Catching two sets of readers at different times will create more oerall attention to the two articles, imo, If you want to merge, I'd approve, of course. Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, separating the two hooks would create two different reader bases. I don't know if combining the hooks would be overall beneficial; it might save hook space, but also misses out on an opportunity to catch multiple reader bases. If not, we go with ALT3, which is not as interesting as ALT6 but separates the hook about the brook from the park's hook. epicgenius (talk) 16:44, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

The DYK nomination for Van Cortlandt Park seems to have run already, so forget about ALT6. In the meantime, is hook 3 okay? epicgenius (talk) 21:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

How about

ALT4 ~~... that Kingsbridge, Bronx was built on what was once an island in Tibbetts Brook?~~ Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:18, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: I'm fine with ALT4 too. I'd modify a little, though: epicgenius (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

ALT4A ... that the Bronx neighborhood of Kingsbridge was built on what was once an island in Tibbetts Brook?

Good, perhaps @Gerda Arendt: would be prepared to approve ALT4a so that this long-delayed nomination can go forward. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:02, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

- Length, Date, Cite, QPQ, and Earwigs check for ALT 4A. Mifter (talk) 19:18, 26 February 2017 (UTC)