Template:Did you know nominations/County courthouses in New Jersey

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) 06:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

County courthouses in New Jersey

(

)

Essex County Courthouse

... that the county courthouses in New Jersey (one pictured) serve 21 counties in 15 vicinages?

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Boston Irish Famine Memorial

Created by Djflem (talk). Self-nominated at 20:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC).

@Djflem: Nominated for DYK two days after creation. This article is currently too short to satisfy DYK length criteria - it has just over 1000 bytes of prose, which is 500 bytes short of the requirement of 1500, as tables and lists are not considered when determining the length of the article (see WP:DYKRULES, points 2b and 2c). Several of the sources used are simply landing pages for the site or subsite in question. For example, ref 2 and ref 3 don't have much (if any) prose, and have a list of entries, which don't match the text of the article. (In particular, the text: "Each county has its own courthouse, and some counties have different facilities for different divisions, such as the criminal, civil, family, and finance courts.") The hook is suitably short with references, but it's not particularly interesting. I suggest expanding the article with something interesting about one or two of the courthouses from the list, for example the oldest one, or one which may have been controversial for some reason. As an example, I see that the second Bergen County Court House was burned by the British during the Revolutionary War in 1780, and that the Hunterdon County Courthouse was site of the Trial of the century. I'm sure there's plenty more material from which to draw to expand this article and find a much more interesting hook. Mind matrix 23:29, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

QPQ done; 1600+bytes. Ref for hook clear. Statements are supported in list provided by refs, just need to use Wikipedia:CALC and Wikipedia:COUNTSORT.Djflem (talk) 06:08, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Please be sure to fill out the ref that's a bare URL; DYK rules require bare URLs to be fixed prior to approval. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:44, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Can you help out here with a number? Have scanned on separate occasions and just can't find bare url. Djflem (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Djflem, I owe you a profound apology. I realize now that I had clicked on the vicinages link in the hook—I'd never heard the term before—and it had the bare URL; for some reason, I thought I saw it on the nominated article's page. There are no bare URLs in the article you've nominated. Pinging Mindmatrix to continue the review. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:07, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

@Djflem: QPQ completed. Text is now a smidge above 1500 bytes, satisfying length criteria. I'm not sure what you mean by "Ref for hook clear", as I didn't raise this as an issue (I even stated "hook is suitably short with references"). I'll assume good faith that the list is comprehensive, validating the numbers you've stated, but keep in mind that this is rarely a good assumption on Wikipedia. I'll also assume good faith for the new ref "Encyclopedia of New Jersey", as Google Books won't display the linked page for me. There is one minor issue - the paragraph "The Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex in Trenton..." has no citation; per WP:DYKSG rule D2, each paragraph should have at least one citation. Once that's done, this will be good to go. Mind matrix 16:32, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Looks like a citation was added -- Esemono (talk) 11:35, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Rather than call for a new reviewer, let's ping Mindmatrix again. BlueMoonset (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Good to go, as the new ref supports the bulk of that statement. (it doesn't mention the Appellate Division, but this is mentioned elsewhere.) Mind matrix 13:26, 8 November 2017 (UTC)