Template:Did you know nominations/Holy Island Waggonway


 * 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 Yoninah (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Holy Island Waggonway

 * ... that the Holy Island Waggonway (pictured) was made up of three successive railway lines on Lindisfarne?


 * ALT1:... that coal and lime were transported on the Holy Island Waggonway (pictured) in opposite directions?
 * ALT2:... that ships were moored between two jetties of the Holy Island Waggonway (pictured) for unloading coal and loading lime?
 * ALT3:... that the Holy Island Waggonway (pictured) was made up of three successive railway lines?
 * Reviewed: Penrhos Feilw Standing Stones

Created by DavidAHull (talk) and NearEMPTiness (talk). Nominated by NearEMPTiness (talk) at 23:01, 28 June 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg This article is a five-fold expansion starting on June 22nd and is new enough and long enough. At the moment the article does not qualify for DYK because there are several paragraphs without citations. There are several other problems. There is a requirement that each fact mentioned in the hook is covered by an inline citation, ie a citation in the actual sentence not just at the end of the paragraph. The word "successive" only appears in the lead and I am having problems deciding the periods for which each tramway was in use and thus whether the periods were successive. Actually, the ALT2 hook should be OK as the facts are mentioned in the National Trust leaflet I can access. The image, which is in the public domain, is most relevant to ALT2. As for ALT1, which cited sentence in the article supports the hook fact? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:53, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your review. The word "sucessive" may be deleted from the hooks, to make them more precise. I understand that WP:DYK articles should ideally have a reference in each paragraph. However, this article is very accurately refenced, and adding more references, just for adhering to this rule, would make it more difficult to read. Therefore, I propose to interpret the citation rule more globally, if you or another reviewer could do so, please. NearEMPTiness (talk) 05:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The removal of the word successive solves one problem. I will leave another reviewer to decide on the eligibility of this article with regard to the DYK rules on citations. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:18, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg I completely fail to see how adding an inline source citation to those paragraphs that have none will make the article more difficult to read. If you wish this to run in DYK, please comply with the DYK citation standard as Cwmhiraeth has requested. Thank you. I have added the required italics to "(pictured)" in the four proposed hooks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the motivation. The article contains now at least one citation to a reliable source for each paragraph and direct quote. I understand that no references are required for the summary in the introduction above the table of content, because these facts are explained in more detail in the article. NearEMPTiness (talk) 12:14, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * NearEMPTiness, much appreciated. I don't believe that any inline source citations are required for this article's intro, but those articles that have quotes or controversial statements or BLP issues in the intro may require them; WP:LEADCITE has the details. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:53, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Thank you. This nomination is now approved for ALT0, ALT2 and ALT3. The image is in the public domain, the article is neutral, and I detected no copyright issues because lack of access to the sources limited the checks I could make. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:28, 6 July 2016 (UTC)