Template:Did you know nominations/Roosevelt station (Sound Transit)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Template:Did you know nominations
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) 06:17, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Roosevelt station (Sound Transit)

(
)

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 00:04, 19 August 2016 (UTC).

  • The article says nothing about "demands", just some people wanted A, others wanted Y, and X was chosen after it turned out the cost difference wasn't as much as thought. I've struggled to find an actually interesting hook, but the best thing I could find was the the sinkhole, and even that's pretty ho-hum. Maybe we could say the tunnels were built using a "boring machine" -- get it? EEng 21:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, transit is quite boring indeed. Perhaps using Standard Radio (and its preserved facade) as a hook would be better? It's mentioned in the slides and video and cited as such. SounderBruce 05:13, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • No issues found with article, ready for human review.
    • ✓ This article has been expanded from 966 chars to 8703 chars since 19:05, 09 March 2016 (UTC), a 9.01-fold expansion
    • ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 8703 characters
    • ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
    • ✓ This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
    • ✓ A copyright violation is unlikely according to automated metrics (7.4% confidence; confirm)
      • Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
  • No overall issues detected
    • ✓ The hook ALT0 is an appropriate length at 128 characters
    • ✓ The hook ALT1 is an appropriate length at 128 characters
    • ✓ The hook ALT2 is an appropriate length at 159 characters
    • ✓ SounderBruce has more than 5 DYK credits. A QPQ review of Template:Did you know nominations/Joaquín Díaz Mena was performed for this nomination.

Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This is not a substitute for a human review. Please report any issues with the bot. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 18:46, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

  • ALT1 at least isn't dead on arrival. EEng 05:30, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, well referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. ALT1 is definitely an improvement; thanks EEng! ALT1 hook ref verified and cited inline. I tweaked the piped link and reduced the overlinking. QPQ done. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 22:27, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
FTR ALT1 wasn't me, it was SounderBruce. EEng 00:15, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • (repeating tick for the bot)
  • I pulled this from q4 as I couldn't confirm the hook. The source says the builders offered to incorporate the facade but doesn't say whether or not the offer was accepted. Gatoclass (talk) 13:48, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
    • @Gatoclass: Reference 38 (at the end of the paragraph, and used to cite the entire paragraph) includes a packet with renderings of the station with the facade incorporated into the south entry (pg. 29). SounderBruce 20:43, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
How about we change the hook to "plans to incorporate"? Gatoclass (talk) 07:53, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Another case in which trouble probably would have been avoided had the source been quoted right next to the hook. EEng 07:56, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm alright with changing the hook. And I've added the source to the hook's sentence to make it better. SounderBruce 05:14, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
ALT2: ...that the future Roosevelt station in Seattle plans to incorporate a preserved Streamline Moderne facade from a music shop that was demolished for its construction?
@Gatoclass: Notice that this has been sitting stale for a long time. Are there anymore issues to address? SounderBruce 09:13, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
I'm surprised this one is still here, no there were no more issues IIRC, but since nobody else has done so in the meantime I will try to find time to complete the review on this tomorrow. Feel free to ping me again if I haven't come back to it in a day or two. Gatoclass (talk) 12:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
@Gatoclass: Seems to have fallen off the main TTDYK page. Hope you don't forget about this one! SounderBruce 07:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I couldn't track down what happened to this one - it must have been inadvertently removed at some time, but I have restored it so it should get promoted soon. Cheers, Gatoclass (talk) 13:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
It was unfortunately removed at the time of its original promotion because of the noinclude problems with the review bot; I've just now deleted those tags so it doesn't recur when this is finally promoted. Very sorry for the delay that caused, SounderBruce. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Roosevelt_station_(Sound_Transit)&oldid=960223227"