Talk:John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant

Did you know nomination

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 Desertarun (talk) 19:11, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Sign at the John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant

• ... that after John Oliver remarked that "the city of Danbury, Connecticut can eat my whole ass", they named a sewage plant after him? source

• Reviewed: André Kisase Ngandu

Converted from a redirect by Theleekycauldron (talk). Self-nominated at 20:32, 24 September 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Quite an amusing hook, all factors check out, QPQ was unneeded but is appreciated. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

• Thanks for the speedy review! I've got a fifth hook in the queue, and by the time this is ready to go, I'll probably have 5 dyk credits, and i've qpqs coming out the ears so I figured it'd just save time. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 02:22, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Oliver Memorial Sewer Plant/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 16:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be taking a look at this article for the January 2022 GAN backlog drive. If you haven't already signed up, please feel free to join in! Although QPQ is not required, if you're feeling generous, I also have a list of GA nominations of my own right here.

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Infobox and lede

• Link phosphorus

Background

Environmental need

• Link Danbury, Connecticut
• to upgrade their waste treatment facilities to remove 98 percent Any way to rephrase to limit repetition of the "to" preposition?

John Oliver

• I don't think the link on "tangential diatribe" is what you think it is; it links to a speech disorder
• Commas around while airing a segment on jury selection in the United States
• Link YouTube

Sewage plant

Building

• Sentence construction makes it hard to tell who or what, exactly, set a price of $102 million
• No comma after "Regional Water Pollution Control Authority"

Cost

• Good

Functions

• Link The News-Times

References

• Good

General comments

• Images are properly licensed and relevant
• No stability concerns in the revision history
• Copyvio score looks good

Putting on hold to allow nominator to address comments. Feel free to ping me with questions, and let me know when you're finished! — GhostRiver 00:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@GhostRiver: thanks so much for the speedy review! I think I got it all :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 01:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for making those changes on your end! I made one small change per MOS:NUMERAL, which specifies that numbers should not be mixed numeric/spelled out in the same sentence, and I think this looks good to go! — GhostRiver 16:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@GhostRiver: awesome! thank you so much again! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 16:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

to FA

The main prohibitor on FA status is the lack of information about the plant's own operations. If reliable sources could note how many people the plant employs and serves, how it's constructed, and other notes about daily operation, it'd have a much better shot at FA. Right now, it leans too heavily on public image and controversy surrounding the plant (i.e. John Oliver), which is due weight, but it doesn't pass muster on a comprehensiveness requirement. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)