Template:Did you know nominations/North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway

The following is an archived discussion of North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway'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 Ashwin147 (talk) 17:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC).

North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway[edit]

(

)

~~... that following the Tay Bridge disaster, a viaduct (pictured) on the North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway was tested so much that it became unsafe and had to be rebuilt?~~

Comment: Please wait until the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway

Created by Thincat (talk), Greg Davidson (talk). Nominated by Simply south (talk) at 14:42, 4 April 2013 (UTC).

DYK hook comment virgin here: please be gentle with me. If we use this, could "was tested so much, it became distorted" please change to something like "was tested so much that it became distorted"? It's probably just me but the comma jars a little. And yes I know it gives two "that"s close together - is that a problem requiring further rewording? DBaK (talk) 08:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't be. Changed. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 09:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! :) DBaK (talk) 09:51, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The result of the AfD was keep.[1] Thincat (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad to see the consensus was to keep this interesting article!

Article - created new on 30 March, so new enough; 4773 characters of readable prose, so long enough; neutral; at least one inline citation to every paragraph; no copy vios detected using earwig and running a few refs through duplication detector; assessed as start/C class, so not a stub.
QPQ not a self nom so not necessary; image is Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Generic, so no problem.
Hook - could it please be re-worded? I noticed the relevant part of the article has now been changed as that had also been confusingly worded but is now fine - I'm not going to suggest an ALT1 myself as this would then require a new reviewer!

Please re-jig the hook to something similar to the way it's worded in the article now, and I'll promptly check the hook and then be able to pass this as everything else is okay. SagaciousPhil - Chat 16:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

ALT1... that following the Tay Bridge disaster, a viaduct on the North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway (replacement pictured) became seriously distorted during load testing and had to be dismantled and rebuilt?

The picture is, of course of the replacement viaduct. Does that give a problem with the hook? Shame not to have a picture. Thincat (talk) 18:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Hook ALT1 - within length criteria at 185 characters (I believe it is discretionary as to whether (replacement pictured) is included in the character count and, on this occasion I am excluding it - it's 208 with it included; correctly formatted; correctly cited/supported by refs #9 and #10 in 'Montrose viaduct' section; and interesting (it was certainly a fact I didn't know). I have struck the original hook, and I also moved Thin Cat's comment down so the ALT1 hook is clear of it.

All other DKY criteria have been checked as indicated above. Thanks for responding so quickly! SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

ALT2... that following the Tay Bridge disaster, a viaduct on the North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway became so seriously distorted during testing that a new one (pictured) had to be built?

I came up with an ALT2 but ALT1 is fine by me if it is OK to go. Thincat (talk) 18:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm happy with either ALT1 or ALT2 so will leave it up to the promoter to decide (ALT2 is 189 characters). SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:59, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I prefer ~~ALT2~~ALT2a because the text "(pictured)" directly follows the mention of the thing that is pictured, whereas with ALT1, the text "(replacement pictured)" follows the name of the railway - and the pic doesn't show the whole railway, just a tiny bit. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:59, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I was considering

ALT2a ... that following the Tay Bridge disaster, a viaduct on the North British, Arbroath and Montrose Railway became so seriously distorted during testing that a new one (pictured) had to be designed and built?

But I'm not so sure that one rolls off the tongue as well. However, the bridge did have to have a new design altogether. Simply south...... eating shoes for just 7 years 22:01, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

It's fine by me. --Redrose64 (talk) 06:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

ALT2 and ALT2a are both technically correct. I am happy with either. Thincat (talk) 08:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)