Template:Did you know nominations/List of Hennepin County Library branches

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) 12:47, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

List of Hennepin County Library branches edit

(

)

~~... that the Hennepin County Library has 41 branches in 24 cities and towns, and historically had locations in a sanatorium and a bookmobile?~~
- ALT1: ... that the Hennepin County Library in Minnesota has 41 branches in 24 cities and towns and historically had locations in a sanatorium and a bookmobile?

Reviewed: Banana Fish

Moved to mainspace by Bobamnertiopsis (talk) and Paul2520 (talk). Nominated by Paul2520 (talk) at 20:12, 24 February 2018 (UTC).

@Bobamnertiopsis and Paul2520: I will review this nomination. epicgenius (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: epicgenius (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

This is looking good overall. The "Libraries not part of the Hennepin County Library system" section is somewhat unsourced, but for DYK, the article doesn't specifically need to prove that it is separate from another library system, and the burden of proof would only apply if the systems were linked somehow. So I'll let that go. However, I am getting a few errors with the Harvard Style references, such as Ref 10 (Christensen 2007) and Ref 58 (Wezeman 1956). This will be good to go once you respond to my proposed hook. epicgenius (talk) 23:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, epicgenius. I fixed the issues with refs 10 & 58. I'm good with your proposed change to the hook.

As for the other libraries - that was originally a bulleted "see also"-style list. The articles are wikilinked, and each page mentions location. But we can keep this in mind going forward (courtesy ping Bobamnertiopsis). = paul2520 (talk) 23:12, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

@Paul2520: I'm not saying that the "Libraries not part" section is not acceptable for DYK. Just the opposite, though it would be optimal if there were sources.

This article is good to go unless @Bobamnertiopsis: has some other objection to the proposed hook or to the content of this review. epicgenius (talk) 23:16, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Good point. I added sources to the section. = paul2520 (talk) 23:35, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks great to me! Thanks Paul2520 and Epicgenius! —Collin^{t c} 23:43, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I see National Libraries Week is April 8-14 (in the US). Could we get this scheduled for one of the days during that week? It is rather nice when DYKs coincide with relevant holidays/months. Pinging Bobamnertiopsis and Epicgenius. = paul2520 (talk) 00:41, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Sure, it can be moved into the special holding area. It falls into the 6-week limit. Note to closing reviewer: Since this falls just within the 6-week holding area limit, can this be scheduled for any time between April 8 and April 14? epicgenius (talk) 00:49, 4 March 2018 (UTC)