Talk:Carroll Street Bridge

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) 05:13, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

The Carroll Street Bridge retracting

• ... that the Carroll Street Bridge (pictured) is one of four remaining retractable bridges in the United States, and one of two in New York City? Source: NY Times 2013
  • ALT1:... that the Carroll Street Bridge (pictured) is one of the least-used crossings operated by the New York City Department of Transportation, seeing about 1,000 cars per day? Source: NYC DOT

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Yang Hongxun

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 01:43, 5 September 2019 (UTC).

• Minor interventions: fixed sources, CE and wikilinking done.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall:

• Plagiasrism: copyvio tool run; no close paraphrasing, copyvio is unlikely.
• Policy other: No MOS issues, typo fixed, citation bot run to fix missing reference parameters
• Hook cited: (reviewer intervened to add citations where needed)
• Pic free: Creative commons attribution (free to use and alter etc.)
• very well writte and sourced article. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 05:46, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Elie plus: Thanks for the review. I will do a QPQ shortly. I prefer to use {{rp}} here, rather than general citations with footnotes, because they are easier to use in an article of this length compared to shortened footnotes. Per WP:CITEVAR the RP template should be fine. epicgenius (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

• I don't object to the use of {{rp}}. I think your article will be ready once you review other submissions. PS: it was a nice read. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 13:39, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

• @Elie plus: Thanks. I appreciate it. I have done a QPQ now. epicgenius (talk) 14:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)