Template:Did you know nominations/Dawlish Avoiding Line


 * The following discussion 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: rejected by Allen3 talk 11:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Insufficient progress toward resolving outstanding issues

Dawlish Avoiding Line

 * ... that construction of the Dawlish Avoiding Line in Devon, United Kingdom was abandoned due to the outbreak of World War II?
 * ALT1:... that construction of the Dawlish Avoiding Line was abandoned due to the outbreak of World War II?
 * Reviewed: Pensford Viaduct

Created by Trident13 (talk). Nominated by Simply south (talk) at 22:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, and adequately sourced. However, there are numerous examples of close paraphrasing in the text which I can see from the online sources, which makes me wonder if text was copied verbatim from the offline source as well? For example:
 * Original: The Treasury would establish an independent special purpose vehicle finance company, backed by a government loan guarantee limited to £26.5million. The GWR was empowered to draw upon “eleven fifty-third parts” of that facility, to support the numerous projects it had submitted for inclusion in the agreement. Principal amongst these, featuring as just a single line in the Treasury agreement (First Schedule, Part 1, Clause 2) read: “Construction of a new deviation line from Dawlish Warren to Newton Abbot”.
 * Article: But in 1935, Chancellor of the Exchequer Neville Chamberlain proposed establishing an independent special purpose vehicle finance company, backed by a government loan guarantee limited to £26.5million. This could then be drawn down by any of the big four railway companies, with the GWR allocated “eleven fifty-third parts” to support the projects it had submitted for inclusion in the agreement, all of which had to be completed by 1 January 1941. Under the 1935 Finance Act, the GWR initially submitted just one proposal in the Treasury agreement (First Schedule, Part 1, Clause 2) which read: “Construction of a new deviation line from Dawlish Warren to Newton Abbot”.
 * Original: It added another 7 miles 3 furlongs and 7 chains of new railway, commencing with a junction outside Dawlish on the initial deviation route (authorised earlier by the 1936 Act) and terminating close to Exminster by a junction with the main line at a point 5 chains south of a bridge carrying Milbury Lane over the line.
 * Article: Adding a further 7 mi, it commenced at the same point south of Dawlish on the initial deviation route (authorised earlier by the 1936 Act), terminating close to Exminster at a junction 5 chain south of a bridge carrying Milbury Lane over the line.
 * Also, per DYK rules, there should be at least one citation in the first paragraph under Present. Yoninah (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg I've just tagged the article with a close paraphrasing template based on the above three cases. Simply south, since you were repinged on February 24 by Orlady, I'll allow another week from then, but in three days, this nomination will be in danger of closing if no action is taken. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg No response has been made, so I'm marking the nomination for closure as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)