- 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) 05:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Oxford Circus
- ... that Oxford Circus has been London's busiest pedestrian crossing? Source: "Oxford Circus has the highest pedestrian volumes recorded anywhere in London." ([1])
- ALT1:... that you can get a bus in any direction within 200 metres (660 ft) from Oxford Circus? Source: " Bus stops are located within 200 metres of the junction on all four approaches." (as above)
- ALT2:... that Oxford Circus was originally called Regent Circus North? Source: "Piccadilly Circus was originally formed in 1819 by the intersection of Piccadilly and Nash's New Street. It was one of the two links which joined together the three sections of Regent Street, and was known as Regent Circus South, Oxford Circus being called Regent Circus North" ([2])
- Reviewed: Bellevue 600
Improved to Good Article status by Ritchie333 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:40, 17 February 2020 (UTC).
- @Ritchie333: Hi, I'll take this. I have to go somewhere but will do a full review later. epicgenius (talk) 19:59, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Here are my comments. epicgenius (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
- The first proposed hook is confusing as it implies that Oxford Circus might no longer be London's busiest pedestrian crossing. ALT1 isn't too interesting (but this might be my NYC bias where bus stops are spaced roughly every 100 metres (330 ft)). ALT2 might be obscure for those who don't know London too well.
- Also, I added {{convert}} to ALT1.
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
This seems pretty short for an intersection of this much renown, and especially for a Good Article. But it does meet all of the criteria. Incidentally (as a fun fact), you could've just claimed this as a 5x expansion and it would still have been eligible (expansion would have been calculated from 12 February). epicgenius (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- This source says Oxford Circus was the busiest but is no longer. In terms of scope, I discovered many sources that refer to "Oxford Circus" actually mean Oxford Street, Regent Street, Soho or Oxford Circus tube station, all of which are GAs. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:57, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: All right then. For ALT0, I suggest replacing "has been" with "was" or something else that confirms it is past tense. "Has been" might signify either past tense or that it is ongoing. The scope is fine: big cities tend to refer to different topics by the same name (our equivalent in NYC might be the Triborough Bridge, which refers to a bridge and to the parent authority). I can take a look at ALT0 again after the hook is changed. epicgenius (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Actually, on further thought, the fact that Oxford Circus is no longer London's busiest pedestrian crossing isn't in that article. So that would have to be added. Provisionally, I think I can technically approve ALT0 and ALT1, though I find the latter to be not too interesting. epicgenius (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: How about ALT3 (a modification of ALT0):
- ... that Oxford Circus was once London's busiest pedestrian crossing?
- I still think ALT1 isn't very interesting, as per my comment above, and ALT2 may not be appealing to a broad audience. However, I'm willing to approve ALT1 if you don't like the proposed ALT3, since ALT1 might possibly be interesting to other people. epicgenius (talk) 16:53, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Do you want ALT3, or should I approve ALT1? epicgenius (talk) 18:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
- epicgenius, you can approve whichever hooks you feel are interesting and are properly sourced, and leave the choice to the promoter, who will certainly take any preferences expressed by Ritchie333 into account. There's no need for this nomination to wait any longer. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks.
Approving ALT1 and ALT3. epicgenius (talk) 22:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks.
- epicgenius, you can approve whichever hooks you feel are interesting and are properly sourced, and leave the choice to the promoter, who will certainly take any preferences expressed by Ritchie333 into account. There's no need for this nomination to wait any longer. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: Do you want ALT3, or should I approve ALT1? epicgenius (talk) 18:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Ritchie333: How about ALT3 (a modification of ALT0):
- Actually, on further thought, the fact that Oxford Circus is no longer London's busiest pedestrian crossing isn't in that article. So that would have to be added. Provisionally, I think I can technically approve ALT0 and ALT1, though I find the latter to be not too interesting. epicgenius (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
