Template:Did you know nominations/Sirloin Stockade

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 Vanamonde93 (talk) 14:10, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Sirloin Stockade

(

)

~~... that circa the 1970s, the first Sirloin Stockade restaurant had a giant 1,800 pound (820 kg) plastic ornamental cow?~~

Reviewed: Kew Gardens – Union Turnpike (IND Queens Boulevard Line)

5x expanded by Northamerica1000 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC).

Hook cited to the Oklahoma State University which is RS. Length, copyvio, newness, etc. check-out. Hook is interesting. QPQ done. No photo. GTG. LavaBaron (talk) 16:55, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Offering a second review: while I agree with newness and other criteria, I don't think we need pounds and kilograms, "giant should do it", nor the years, ending in a trimmed

ALT1: ~~... that the first Sirloin Stockade restaurant had a giant plastic ornamental cow?~~ Please get rid of citation messages. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Here's an alt below; I like including the weight in the hook, which demonstrates the massiveness of the ornament. Since it's in the U.S., we can just use pounds. Another user later added the kilogram measure to the hook after I devised it. Well, ticking for a new review needed. Sigh. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that the first Sirloin Stockade restaurant had a giant 1,800 pound plastic ornamental cow?
everything is good LavaBaron (talk) 04:21, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Just for my education (English is not my first language): what does "circa the 1970s" mean about the weight (where it is mentioned)? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:42, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

I moved the "circa the 1970s" part to an earlier part in the hook (diff). North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Better write an ALT next time, or the discussion is hard to follow. - I had hooks where I wanted something badly, and after all, it wasn't even mentioned, so I am out of here ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:53, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Since the only person who has approved this is LavaBaron, we need another reviewer to also approve the hook (Gerda Arendt didn't), so I've pulled it back from prep. Note that the ALT2 version that was initially promoted had the "(820 kg)" added to it by Cwmhiraeth, and I think that's likely to occur so long as a weight is given: hooks with weights or other measurements typically end up with dual measurements to make it understandable to the majority of people. I feel the hook is more effective with the weight included; "giant" can mean almost anything, but 1800 pounds is nearly a ton, which gives a far better sense that it's huge. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:08, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I had mistakenly thought that Gerda had provided a second review but I see I was wrong. The article is a five-fold expansion and is new enough and long enough. Approving ALT2 which is suitably cited. The article is neutral and I detected no policy issues. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Note: I boldly linked "pound" in the hook while promoting it, since it is a ~~silly~~ not-universal measure. Regards, Vanamonde93 (talk) 14:10, 19 July 2016 (UTC)