- 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 Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:08, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
B&B Carousell
edit- ... that the B&B Carousell, built over 100 years ago, is Coney Island's only remaining historic carousel? Sources: (1) NY Daily News. "The ride, the last of Coney's historic carousels, was set to be dismantled and auctioned off until the city stepped in and bought it for $1.8 million. It's now being painstakingly restored in an Ohio workshop." (2) NRHP nomination, PDF p. 5. "Constructed in 1906/1909, The B&B Carousell is located on the north side of the boardwalk, to the west of West 15th Street, as part of Steeplechase Plaza in the Coney Island neighborhood of the New York City borough of Brooklyn, Kings County, New York."
- ALT1:... that the B&B Carousell's band organ is one of three of its kind in known existence? Source: NRHP nomination, p. 13. "The band organ is one of only three of its type known to exist."
- ALT2:... that the "Carousell" in B&B Carousell's name is based on the spelling used in the catalogs of carousel builder William F. Mangels? Source: NRHP nomination, p. 13. "The spelling of the B&B Carousell with the double letter 'l' that Bishoff and Brienstein adopted was the spelling that Mangels preferred to use in his catalogs."
- Comment: Starting August 4, I (Epicgenius) will be offline for an extended period of time.
- Reviewed: Did you know nominations/Carrie Goldberg
Created by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 16:32, 1 August 2018 (UTC).
- General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
- currently an orphan. Not a hard block, but best to correct before promoting this, in case it gets a maintenance template (cf QPQ)
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: - Earwig finds two distinctive sentences copied from the this NYT piece,
which isn't even cited in the articleALT1 is very similar to the NRHP source, but I don't see a problem with that; it's difficult to rephrase and not (I believe) copyrighted, being a US government document.
.
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
ALT0 is the best of the three hooks. ALT2 is the weakest. Since the image is free content, you could add that to the nomination, but I think it's hard to make out when you shrink it down. Other than the NYT copyvio (which, could you not?) and incoming links, the article looks good. I enjoyed reading it. › Mortee talk 14:03, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Mortee: Thanks for the review. To clarify:
- The "copyvio" was text that was in the Coney Island article, which was then moved here. I've fixed it.
- That particular NYTimes piece is sourced in the article. It's ref 3.
- Not sure what you mean by the fact that this article is orphaned. There are plenty of links from article space. epicgenius (talk) 23:04, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Epicgenius, thank you for explaining, and sorry for some shoddy mistakes on my part. I somehow blinkeredly thought there was only one NYT reference and the first in the wikisource is the other one. That's embarrassing. Thanks for explaining that the copyright problem came from Coney Island, not your writing. There seems to be one sentence left ("Theresa Rollison, a painter with Carousels and Carvings...") in the Carousell article. Orphanhood, no idea how I messed that up. I may have been switching between two many tabs and ended up looking at what linked to the talk page. Again, embarrassing. I try to be careful but clearly failed on this occasion and I'm sorry for it. I've struck that line above, but left the copyright issue (not your fault, but wherever it came from its a problem). After that it should be clear, and I'll tick it unless you or anyone else feels that given I mucked up the original review somewhat, it should get a second pair of eyes for reassurance. › Mortee talk 23:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Just for completeness I ran Earwig over Coney Island and it found two more sentences from a different NYT story, which I've now removed. No other problems detected there. › Mortee talk 23:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Mortee: No problem. I don't blame you, as I made some mistakes myself. I definitely didn't notice the copyvio when I moved that sentence over from the Coney Island article. In any case, I have paraphrased the two sentences you pointed out. epicgenius (talk) 23:55, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
