- 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 Fuebaey (talk) 05:32, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
LinkNYC
edit- ... that New York City plans to use its payphone network to provide free WiFi coverage over the five boroughs?
- Reviewed: Tomorrow
- Comment: Short review
Created by AbderrahmanNajjar (talk). Nominated by RTG (talk) at 22:22, 17 November 2014 (UTC).
@RTG: What's good: Created November 17, 1,977 characters, neutral, well sourced. Hook is 106 characters, interesting and hot off the presses, cited to ref 2, neutral. No image. What needs work: 1) QPQ needs doing. 2) "and will hold a public hearing before taking a vote" is a ten-word phrase that shows up in ref 1 and the article; it's a little more than I'm comfortable with...could it be rephrased so it wasn't verbatim from the source? BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 00:08, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Bobamnertiopsis: I've rephrased the public hearing part. As for the picture part, I could upload a picture of a Link unit (either one of them, or both) and use in the article. However, they're released as part of the media kit, copyrighted. The Flickr account listed in the media kit for high-res pictures and use lists the license as "copyrighted" under each picture. The media kit and website, however, don't mention any type of license, so it's safe to assume that it's all copyrighted. The Link pictures fulfill Wikipedia's criteria for fair-use upload, but I'm not entirely convinced it serves such an important role in the article. No text logo (such as the one in the website or media kit) is found in the Flickr account (to be exempt from upload & use restrictions). Please advise on that if you would. ¬Hexafluoride (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, no, I don't think this needs a picture at all...it will, I'm sure, get one once these things are actually built but it's not a problem that there's no picture now. The comment "No image" from above was merely remarking upon the fact that the hook doesn't include an image and as such, there's no necessity to check whether said image is free because it does not exist. Thanks for fixing that line; QPQ still needs to be done. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 00:15, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Bobamnertiopsis: @RTG: was the nominator, he has to review a DYK, if I understand QPQ correctly
- Yep, they or someone else needs to do a QPQ before this can advance. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 07:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Bobamnertiopsis: @RTG: was the nominator, he has to review a DYK, if I understand QPQ correctly
- Oh, no, I don't think this needs a picture at all...it will, I'm sure, get one once these things are actually built but it's not a problem that there's no picture now. The comment "No image" from above was merely remarking upon the fact that the hook doesn't include an image and as such, there's no necessity to check whether said image is free because it does not exist. Thanks for fixing that line; QPQ still needs to be done. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 00:15, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
- @Bobamnertiopsis: I've rephrased the public hearing part. As for the picture part, I could upload a picture of a Link unit (either one of them, or both) and use in the article. However, they're released as part of the media kit, copyrighted. The Flickr account listed in the media kit for high-res pictures and use lists the license as "copyrighted" under each picture. The media kit and website, however, don't mention any type of license, so it's safe to assume that it's all copyrighted. The Link pictures fulfill Wikipedia's criteria for fair-use upload, but I'm not entirely convinced it serves such an important role in the article. No text logo (such as the one in the website or media kit) is found in the Flickr account (to be exempt from upload & use restrictions). Please advise on that if you would. ¬Hexafluoride (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Bobamnertiopsis, in fact this nomination does not require a QPQ: the new requirement that nominators must supply QPQs for articles they did not create/expand did not begin until November 21 of this year, so this particular nomination is grandfathered under the prior rules that did not require reviews for non-self-nominations. Please continue with the review; the absence of a QPQ here is perfectly legal. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:15, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
In that case, good to go! BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 01:13, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
