Template:Did you know nominations/Vine Street, London


 * 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 Allen3 talk 22:48, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Vine Street, London

 * ... that Vine Street has seen erotic asphyxiation, libel charges against Oscar Wilde and a square on the British Monopoly board?


 * Reviewed: Lola (song)

5x expanded by Ritchie333 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:30, 18 July 2015 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg to go.--Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 23:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg I think it would be helpful if you explicitly listed what you have checked, ie: date expanded, article length, verifiability of hooks and suitability of prose, copyvio checks etc - otherwise the prep builders may be suspicious and send it back. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Actually there are a few problems:
 * Duplicate links to Marlborough Street Magistrates Court and Regents Street
 * Done Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "curtailed" seems unclear, "shortened" seems clearer to many people.
 * Copyedited this bit Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  11:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The first three paragraphs in the last section are too short.
 * I don't believe (unless can clarify) that that's part of the DYK criteria, and the trials and tribulations of Oscar Wilde are best left to his own article. Ritchie333 (talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  11:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The second image requires an US PD tag.
 * No idea, ask who uploaded it on Commons. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)  <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  11:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That's basically it. Thanks, Tomandjerry211 (alt) (talk) 20:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed that explicitly lists what was checked, since even the re-review doesn't do this, mentioning some non-DYK criteria (this is not a GAN, and paragraph size is not mentioned for DYK). As best I can see, the second image in the article does at present have a US PD license, but the reviewer should double check. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The following has been checked in this review by Maile
 * QPQ by Ritchie333
 * Eligibility
 * Article created by Skyring on August 8, 2005, and was a 299 character Stub before expansion by nominator
 * On nomination date of July 18, 2015, article had reached 5523 characters (0 words) "readable prose size"
 * Article is NPOV, currently stable, no edit wars, no dispute tags
 * Sourcing
 * Every paragraph sourced inline, both online and offline
 * No bare URLs, and no external links used as inline sources
 * Hook
 * Hook is 123 characters, NPOV, stated in three places under "Events" section, and appropriately sourced where stated.
 * Image
 * No image in the hook
 * Tools
 * Duplication Detector on all online sources found no copyvio or close paraphrasing.

Everything passes DYK criteria as stated above. G2G. — Maile (talk) 20:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)