Template:Did you know nominations/Newbury Park tube station
- 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) 07:16, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Newbury Park tube station
[edit]- ... that residents of Newbury Park had to wait for ten years for the station to be step-free? Sources: several in the article in step-free access section
- ALT1:... that residents of Newbury Park had to wait for ten years for lifts to be added at the station? Sources: several in the article in step-free access section
Improved to Good Article status by Vincent60030 (talk). Self-nominated at 06:02, 13 January 2019 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Well cited article, although the lead has no citations. I would like to see inline citations for the statement "Lifts were fully installed at Newbury Park in November 2018 to provide step-free access to the station, approximately 10 years after abandoning the project." in the lead, which is essentially your hook. You can piece together the hook and citations in the step-free access section, but would prefer it definitely stated and sourced directly after - Interesting:
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
Almost there, just want hook clearly cited in the article. Appears to be QPQ exempt as their user page only cites four DYK nominations. Article is recently GA, long enough, no copyvio issues. Also, could I propose ALT2:... that residents of Newbury Park had to wait ten years for step-free access at Newbury Park tube station? SamCordes (talk) 08:58, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- @SamCordes: Ok, will cite it accordingly. Though lead sections technically need not have inline citations based on MOS. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 12:43, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
- @SamCordes: I’ve made the necessary changes to the article. Could you please give it a final check? Thanks =D VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 15:00, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
