Template:Did you know nominations/United States Courthouse (Austin, Texas, 2012)
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
United States Courthouse (Austin, Texas, 2012)
edit
Austin United States Courthouse
- ... that the Austin United States Courthouse (pictured) was given abundant windows and natural lighting to represent the importance of transparency in the judiciary? Source: "Transparency was a programmatic and planning criterion set by the judges, who valued the expression of this aspect of the judicial system." (Connolly, Lawrence (May–June 2013). "Irreconcilable Differences Resolved". Texas Architect: 38.)
- Reviewed: Youth in Africa
Created by Bryanrutherford0 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:40, 24 January 2018 (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:
- suggest removing scare quotes from "transparency". Instead link the word to Open government
| Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Well-written, well-sourced. Needs one small tweak, otherwise fine. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:14, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I'd prefer to have the word link to Open government or Transparency (behavior), but, as I understood it, links for the front page aren't supposed to lead to articles with cleanup tags, which both of those feature prominently. I don't think I'm in a position to fix either of them adequately, or I would have done so.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 19:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Bryanrutherford0: sorry for the slow reply (I was expecting a ping if I was needed), and thanks to @BlueMoonset for a reminder on my talk.
- Obviously, the main article should not have cleanup tags, but I wasn't aware of the same applying to unbolded links. I can see a case for and against, but as far as I can see neither the rules nor the supplementary guidelines mention such a rule. Maybe it's assumed to be self-evident?
- Anyway, Transparency (behavior) is the more relevant link, and it doesn't look too bad -- just one section with uncited tags on points which look uncontroversial. So I'd be OK with a link to that, but whether or not it's linked, please remove the scare quotes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:51, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: That works for me—done! A previous hook I wrote was shot down for linking to an article with cleanup tags, so I thought I'd play it safe; however, I quite agree that it's more clear and informative with the link included. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 04:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Bryanrutherford0: Great. I have also removed the scare quotes from the article.[1] All issues now resolved. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:46, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- @BrownHairedGirl: That works for me—done! A previous hook I wrote was shot down for linking to an article with cleanup tags, so I thought I'd play it safe; however, I quite agree that it's more clear and informative with the link included. Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 04:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I'd prefer to have the word link to Open government or Transparency (behavior), but, as I understood it, links for the front page aren't supposed to lead to articles with cleanup tags, which both of those feature prominently. I don't think I'm in a position to fix either of them adequately, or I would have done so.-Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 19:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Good to go. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
