Template:Did you know nominations/Southwest Airlines Flight 345
- 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: rejected by Yoninah (talk) 09:42, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Not a 5x expansion of a previously-existing article
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Southwest Airlines Flight 345[edit]
- ... that Southwest Airlines Flight 345 suffered stress overload to its nose landing gear forcing the closure of LaGuardia Airport in New York. The plane was later shipped by barge to upstate New York.
- CORRECTED
- ... that Southwest Airlines Flight 345 suffered stress overload to its landing gear, and the aircraft's next journey was from LaGuardia Airport to Albany, NY to be scrapped?
Recreated by Usernamen1 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:46, 7 August 2016 (UTC).
I have just fixed this nomination so that it has the proper DYK template and subsidiary templates included, and that the hook has a proper bolded link. However, as I was doing so, the article history was restored, and based on that the article does not appear to be eligible, as it was originally created back on July 23, 2013, and deleted at AfD on August 2, 2013. At this point, it cannot be a new article, because it existed before, and it cannot be a 5x expansion because it was 1978 prose characters before it was deleted and userfied, and it's only 2087 prose characters now. If it should be significantly expanded and improved to the point that it becomes a Good Article, it would be eligible for nomination within seven days of being listed as a GA, so that route is open, if in the future. Other issues:
- There was a huge quoted section from one of the sources on the 6 August 2013 FTSB report. Indeed, so much is quoted that it violates Fair Use rules. I have just deleted it. You can always include the relevant information in your own words.
- Three references are bare URLs, which is not allowed under DYK rules. These must be fixed.
- The hook would need further formatting and refining. A standard DYK hook is a single sentence that starts with three dots, a space, and then "that", and ends with a question mark. In addition, the article mentions nothing about "shipped by barge to update New York"; all hook facts must not only be in the article, but sourced by the end of the sentence in which they appear.
- There are issues with the prose: the descriptions are oddly phrased, especially in the introductory paragraph. The article also needs to be updated to reflect subsequent events, such as whether Southwest followed through on the refunds and free tickets. (Depending on what additional information is available, the "Response" section should perhaps be changed to "Subsequent events".)
- Sorry for the bad news. Best of luck with expanding the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:35, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- I will work on it. However, the first point of being a new article should not disqualify it. 3 years ago, it was deleted. That means gone. If it weren't for me, it would still be dead. Now it is alive. The alive date is yesterday. Wikipedia should be encouraging and not try to discourage things. If so, I will certainly work on the other things. Usernamen1 (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
3 citations reformatted. Usernamen1 (talk) 03:53, 8 August 2016 (UTC)- Fair use problem fixed. Did not quote from citation.
- Descriptions rephrase so not odd, introduction fixed.
- Barge reference now has a citation.Usernamen1 (talk) 04:11, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
- I will work on it. However, the first point of being a new article should not disqualify it. 3 years ago, it was deleted. That means gone. If it weren't for me, it would still be dead. Now it is alive. The alive date is yesterday. Wikipedia should be encouraging and not try to discourage things. If so, I will certainly work on the other things. Usernamen1 (talk) 03:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
The AfD was closed as keep. I don't have time to review this now, so a new reviewer is requested. Pppery 11:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- because the page is not new. User:Usernamen1 has stated the problem and newness is not a thing that can be changed. I do have a COI in this case as I restored, userfied, and history merged the article, and I do think it does not deserved to be deleted. So anyone else who thinks I am biased here can override this "NO". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)