Template:Did you know nominations/Wyoming Highway 257
- 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 05:05, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Wyoming Highway 257
- ... that Wyoming Highway 257 took over 15 years to plan and construct? Source: Casper Star-Tribune
- ALT1:... that construction of Wyoming Highway 257 was delayed for several yeras by an eminent domain lawsuit? Source: Casper Star-Tribune
5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 06:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC).
Copyvio score looks strong at 7.4%, while the article meets the 5x expansion requirement and the size itself is eligible for DYK, plus the sources are reliable enough. However, the hook's fact is not mentioned by the source, though I believe the original is the most appropriate wording once you have fixed this. Also, "over 15 years after it was first proposed" does not actually back up the construction part. K. Peake 07:53, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- The copyvio report shows that most of the problematic phrases are "Wyoming Department of Transportation" (the state agency), the name of the webpage (used in the External links section), and "opened to traffic on December 31, 2015." (a common phrase). The ALT0 hook's source mentions that "Talk of building a bypass began in the late 1990s", and 15 years beyond the end of the 1990s would be 2015, when the article was published. SounderBruce 08:34, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- SounderBruce My usage of the word strong actually meant the copyvio score definitely looks great, also the source is accurate now you have explained but maybe reword the prose to reflect this hook more? K. Peake 08:43, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
- I think readers should be able to infer, since planning and construction will obviously come after the first proposal. I'd rather not compromise the prose just for the sake of a DYK hook. SounderBruce 08:45, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
No problems remaining, then; should be good to go! K. Peake 07:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
