Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton Railway

< Template:Did you know nominations
The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 11:52, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton Railway

edit
(
)

5x expanded by King jakob c 2 (talk). Self nominated at 16:53, 4 June 2013 (UTC).

  • Is there any way to source this with something that does not take 10 minutes to download?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Date, length and ref all check out, but the ref is really annoying. It takes 10 minutes to download and the WP:IC is almost bare.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:40, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • The hook is incorrect and is based on a misreading of the source, for the reasons set forth on the article's talk page. Kablammo (talk) 15:04, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
    • Actually the hook is correct and supported by its citation although neither reflects the article content.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:30, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Tony, there is nothing in the source that says only this final section was termed the "cannon ball".Kablammo (talk) 15:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
  • as to first hook. The proposed hook is not supported by the source, for the reasons set forth above and in more detail on the talk page. I have not passed on the reliability of the source, which appears to be a product of a local, 12-member historical society. Kablammo (talk) 15:56, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
    • The hook is supported by the source. It is just that the article content needs to be amended to reflect the hook and the source.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:54, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
      • Tony, please look at the source. The proposed hook says that the stretch of the Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton Railway between Ashley and Wilkes-Barre was known as the "cannon ball". But the source only says that "It was a 45 minute roller coaster ride nicknamed 'The Cannon Ball'".[1], p. 2. The question is, what is "It"? The assumption has been maded that it is the last leg of the journey, from Ashley to Wilkes-Barre. That is unwarranted, and it did not take 45 minutes to go that distance. The timetable in the article shows that express trains could go from Hezleton to Wilkes-Barre—the entire length of the line—in 45 minutes. It only took seven minutes to go from Ashley to Wilkes-Barre. Therefore "It" must be the route as a whole, not just the final, 3-1/4 mile section from Ashley to Wilkes-Barre.
      • The alternate hook, that the railroad was the first to have a guarded third rail, is supported by the source. Whether the source is reliable is an issue I won't pass on, as I have my doubts about it. Kablammo (talk) 11:07, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
  • This is the sort of thing that makes me despair of DYK (although it's far from the worst)
I "didn't know" that it was called the Canon Ball. However I still don't care that it was. This is utterly trivial and in no way was this some new and fascinating snippet for me to glean, surely the purpose behind DYK? It might just as well say "Did you know that it opened on November 7, 1892?" I didn't know that either, and I still don't care. This isn't Rocket at Rainhill, or Brunel's 7' gauge, it's just mundane trivia.
The first "guarded third rail" is a little better and could show promise. However just what is a "guarded third rail" ? The article fails to go anywhere into this. It wasn't the first third rail system (by some years), so just what is it (if anything) that makes the guarding so crucial?
Sourcing is not the problem with this DYK. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
According to this (yes, I know it seems unreliable, so I won't put it in the article, but it makes some sense at least), third rails are guarded to protect them from the weather. King Jakob C2 15:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I know exactly why third rails are guarded. They're guarded to protect against freezing rain, sometimes other forms of frost buildup. This isolates the contact shoe from the rail, disconnecting the current. It's only a substantial problem in some climates - it's not done here in the UK, for instance. It's also considered today that later designs of contact shoe with some ice-clearing ability make this expensive shielding (it's not too expensive to provide, but it rots and needs maintenance) unnecessary.
How much of this does the DYK article explain? What's the point of a DYK hook like this that goes nowhere? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:49, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
I added a sentence to clear that up. If that doesn't work, then... ALT 2: ... that the Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton Railway was the first interurban railroad with no grade crossings? King Jakob C2 17:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

For whatever it's worth, that sort of small-press or self-published secondary sources are pretty much the norm for US local railroad history (and probably for the UK as well). For example, George W. Hilton's "American Narrow Gauge Railroads", an academic tertiary source on the subject, cites those sorts of sources in a number of entries on individual railroads. Choess (talk) 01:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Needs a new reviewer, especially of the new and unreviewed ALT2 hook. Striking the original hook as unsupported. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:45, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
    • ALT 1 is sourced. ALT 2 is not supported by the source, which says "one of the earliest interurban to use a private fenced right-of –way without grade crossings."--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:13, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
      • I am sort of curious as to why ALT 1 was not approved earlier so I will await feedback before checking this one off.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:15, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Note to promoter:

  • Alt 1 was rejected by me, for reasons mentioned on this page and the article talk page. That position was accepted by the author when he changed the hook, a change reverted by Tony. The orginal proposed hook is incorrect.
  • I propose this hook:
ALT 3: ... that the Wilkes-Barre and Hazleton Railway was the one of the first interurban railroads with no grade crossings?
That is supported by the source.
  • I have not passed on reliability of the source, but it is acceptable to Andy Dingley and likely by Choess, who are active in this area.

Kablammo (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Have struck ALT1 and ALT2 for the reasons mentioned above. ALT3 needs reviewing. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:04, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
    • New enough, long enough, fully referenced. Hook verified against online source. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure if "to use a private fenced right-of–way without grade crossings" (from the source) is the same as "no grade crossings" (in ALT3). And, btw, if the source is now considered acceptable, ALT1 about the "first use of a guarded third rail" may be good, too. --PFHLai (talk) 14:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Since the above issue stopped this from being promoted, I'm adding an icon to prevent another attempted promotion pending discussion of it. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm fine with ALT 1. King Jakob C2 11:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
I don't mind ALT1, and IMO it should technically pass for DYK. But Andy Dingley has a good point. It would be less of a letdown for MainPage readers if they can click and actually find more info about the guarding of the third rail -- pretty sure the hook doesn't mean there were security guards lined up along the tracks. Further elaboration is recommended. (Is there a wikipage about this guarding business? If not, is this another DYK opportunity?) --PFHLai (talk) 04:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
This might shed some light on the matter. King Jakob C2 00:37, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
For the record, I have already given the green tick above to ALT1, which is repeated here to make life easier for hook promotors:
The suggested elaboration on the guarding is just a recommended course of action to address the concern of Andy Dingley. This is not required for DYK purposes. However, if anyone wants to make this hook a double-hook with new materials in article space (a new article on guarding or an expansion of an existing track-related article), please indicate here quickly before this hook gets promoted as is. Hope this helps. --PFHLai (talk) 07:33, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Wilkes-Barre_and_Hazleton_Railway&oldid=1022406940"