Template:Did you know nominations/Great Island


 * 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) 06:00, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Great Island

 * ... that the 12,000 inhabitants of Great Island in Cork Harbour are served by a single 200-year-old road bridge? Source: Irish Examiner "[There are] 12,000 inhabitants of Cobh and the Great Island [and] the only bridge leading into Great Island, at Belvelly, is 200 years old"
 * ALT1:... that the 12,000 inhabitants of Great Island in Cork Harbour were temporarily 'stranded' during Storm Ophelia in 2017? Source: Irish Examiner "12,000 inhabitants of Cobh and the Great Island were left stranded for hours during Monday [16 Oct 2017]'s Storm Ophelia"
 * Reviewed: Bushwick Inlet Park

Created/expanded by Guliolopez (talk). Self-nominated at 22:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC).


 * Hi Guliolopez, review follows: 5x expansion confirmed from 1 August to 4 August; article is of good length and is well written; article is cited inline throughout to appropriate sources; no overly close paraphrasing detected and all direct quotes are so noted; both hooks are interesting and cited in the article (I added a little more to the storm Ophelia section to make it clear that it backed up the second hook). I deleted "road" from the first hook as it looks from Google maps that the bridge carries a rail line also.  I note there is some discrepancy in the sources as to the population of the island.  The figures from the 2016 census sum to 14,878, though the newspaper sources state 12,000 inhabitants.  However I am happy that the article deals with this in the infobox by stating "12,000-14,000" and the hook uses the lower figure.  QPQ has been done.  Looks good to go - Dumelow (talk) 13:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much . I have however restored "road" to the hook. There is a separate rail bridge - but this is 1km to the west of the road bridge here. Technically therefore there are two bridges. (1x road bridge. And 1x rail bridge.) Hence the qualifier "road" is required when saying "single bridge". Guliolopez (talk) 17:06, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for correcting my rather stupid mistake! Can't believe I did that... - Dumelow (talk) 17:39, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

regretfully this has had to be pulled prior to its appearance on the main page, due to a couple of misleading points in the hook. This was raised by User:The Rambling Man on his errors page, and the concerns are as follows: Thanks, congratulations on a well-written article, and hopefully these issues can be solved quickly and the article pushed back up to the queue again. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:09, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) The island is served not just by the road bridge, but also by a rail bridge and by ferries from France. Whereas the current wording of the hook, "that the 12,000 inhabitants of Great Island in Cork Harbour are served by a single 200-year-old road bridge? implies that this single bridge is the only way to access the island.
 * 2) The population as given in the article is not exactly 12,000 but between 12,000 and 14,000. So we should find some way to make the wording match this range. (Or update the article with a new exact verifiable figure).


 * Hello. RE:
 * Road bridge. The island is served by a single road bridge. One road bridge. There are no other road bridges. It was not the intention to suggest (and certainly not to "mislead") that there are no other means of getting onto the island (by boat, ferry, swim, whatever - which are all either mentioned and referenced in the article or otherwise inferred by those readers who reasonably recognise that islands are typically, de facto, accessible by water). Instead, it was the intention to note that there is no other access means by road. No other road bridges. I do not see this as an error of fact in the hook. Might a reader misinterpret? I guess. Perhaps. Was that reader misled? That seems unfair.
 * Population. I stated 12,000 (in the hook) as this is the number given in the reference (supporting the hook). Presumably, if I'd stated something other than the number in the supporting reference, the hook would've been rejected. And rightly so. That there are estimates used in other sources (set-out in the body and its refs) is, again, not an error of fact. Or an attempt to mislead. Rather an issue with the availability of a single definitive number. Principally due, presumably, to the fact that the census boundaries do not precisely equate to the island boundaries. And that, as with all settled places, populations (even census populations) are not "absolute". Again I do not see this as misleading. Not least as, given the "rounded" nature of the number, a reader might reasonably recognise that it is an approximation.
 * In any event, given the apparent concern, I will suggest ALT2 and ALT3 hooks (minor variants of the two prior offerings):
 * ALT2:... that the single road bridge to Great Island in Cork Harbour is more than 200 years old?
 * ALT3:... that approximately 12,000 inhabitants of Great Island in Cork Harbour were temporarily 'stranded' during Storm Ophelia in 2017?
 * While the first is weaker and second is longer than ideal, I hope both are considered less potentially confusing to the reader. (If it counts for anything, my own opinion is that ALT3 is (now) perhaps "hookier" than the other.)
 * Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 01:44, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Amakuru. I disagree, as you can see we discussed both apparently "misleading" points in my review above.  Both 12k and 14k are covered by reliable sources, the hook used the lower of the two which is reasonable to me, and the island is only served by a single "road bridge", the hook didn't claim it was served by a single "bridge".  To quickly resolve this, I am content with either of the two new alts offered by Guliolopez above - Dumelow (talk) 07:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I fully understand what you're both saying, and I'm sorry if you think I pulled it unnecessarily. I probably could have tweaked the hook a bit myself, and maybe it was fine as it was, or course there was no intention to mislead. But we do want the main page to be as representative of our best work as we possibly can and I didn't have a lot of time so I erred on the side of caution. In retrospect I should have pulled you guys into the conversation yesterday morning when this was first raised because there was plenty of time to address it then. I do like the fact about the single road bridge so my preference would be for Alt-2, but you guys can decide that... I don't know how the queues are usually controlled but happy to do anything I can to get this pushed back through ASAP. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 10:02, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg No worries, I appreciate there was no malice on anyone's part. I was perhaps a little testy earlier this morning.  I've struck the two old hooks and marked these new alts as approved. I'll read the review to the approved list and it should get picked up again for inclusion in a future set - Dumelow (talk) 10:15, 17 August 2018 (UTC)