Template:Did you know nominations/Denbigh Hall railway station

The following is an archived discussion of Denbigh Hall railway station's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:11, 11 March 2013 (UTC).

Denbigh Hall railway station

(

)

~~... that due to overrunning engineering works, early railway passengers from London to Birmingham had to change at Denbigh Hall station to continue their journey by stage-coach?~~

Created by Optimist on the run (talk). Self nominated at 22:23, 21 February 2013 (UTC).

Good to go. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Comment by nominator - if this is approved, is it possible to schedule it for 9 April - 175th anniversary of opening? I hope to get some up-to-date photos of the area by then. An optimist on the run! 08:38, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

The usual limit for holding hooks is six weeks, and it's a few days over that now. However, there's going to be a delay in approval that may get this within six weeks: I find the current hook extremely confusing: "overrunning engineering works" means absolutely nothing to me. Looking at the article, I see that there were construction delays so the tunnel could be completed (a couple of years behind schedule, if its article is to be believed, though the railway station itself was only needed for under six months). Under the circumstances, I think a new hook is in order, and a new reviewer as well, since this was not "good to go" and I have no idea what was actually checked. I'd further recommend against employing the link to "bustitution", as it is anachronistic and inappropriate, and the extra link further distracts from the article link in the hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The date is not that important - if I'd realised before I submitted the article that the anniversary was impending I might have held back, but it's not that important (especially as it's not mentioned in the hook). As far as the wording goes, I deliberately phrased it to be jocular. As most regular users of the rail network in Britain will know, overrunning engineering works (Google) is a frequently used excuse for delayed or cancelled trains, especially on Monday mornings following work over the weekend. Trains are often replaced by buses, hence the reference to bustitution. Yes, it's Easter-eggy, but I wanted to make the point that there's nothing modern in the concept of trains being replaced by other forms of transport. An alternative hook could be ... that due to delays in the construction of Kilsby Tunnel, early railway passengers from London to Birmingham had to change at Denbigh Hall station to continue their journey by stage-coach, but that seems dull and lifeless to me. An optimist on the run! 09:15, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Since the Kilsby Tunnel delays were due to quicksand, incorporating the quicksand into the hook could liven things quite nicely. My point about "overrunning engineering works" is that the phrase meant nothing to me—as you note, it's UK-centric—and will likely be similarly opaque to much of the rest of the English-speaking world. As an American, the wording left me completely adrift, and not in a way that piqued my interest, either. If you want to include the image, be sure to add "(pictured)" at the appropriate point in the proposed hook, so the reader can tell what the picture represents. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:32, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

I've raised a query at WT:UKRAIL, to get suggestions for an alternative hook. An optimist on the run! 09:28, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Alt 1: *... that due to builders digging a tunnel through quicksand, early railway passengers from London to Birmingham had to change at Denbigh Hall station to continue their journey by stage-coach? Ning-ning (talk) 10:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Alt 2 *... that the world's first bustitutes ran from Denbigh Hall station? Ning-ning (talk) 10:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it was the world's first and the article does not mention that either. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 12:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Alt 3 ... that due to quicksand, passengers on the London and Birmingham Railway temporarily changed at Denbigh Hall railway station to travel onwards by stage coach? Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 11:40, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I also think the picture is too small to see. Simply south...... catching SNOWballs for just 6 years 11:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions - I agree with S.S. re alt 2, I've got no evidence that it was the first, just an early example of it. My personal preference is for alt 3, but I'd be happy with alt 1. An optimist on the run! 06:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I've combined aspects of ALT1 and ALT3 with a little more detail to create ALT4—in particular, I thought specifying that the railway was new and that this particular odd inconvenience lasted for over five months. I also felt that avoiding the repeat of "railway" was a good idea; I hope the word "detrained" is one you like. I have struck ALT2 as problematic. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

ALT4: ... that due to quicksand, passengers on the new London and Birmingham Railway detrained for over five months at Denbigh Hall station to continue their journey by stagecoach?

Full review needed given lack of clarity from original reviewer: new reviewer should specify which hooks are approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Article is new enough and long enough. The reference referring to the quicksand problems in the tunnel is quite explicit and I would go for ALT4. I have struck out the other hooks for clarity. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)