Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/U.S. Route 64 in Oklahoma

< 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 Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

U.S. Route 64 in Oklahoma

edit
(
)

Created by Scott5114 (talk), TCN7JM (talk). Nominated by Scott5114 (talk) at 06:55, 25 November 2013 (UTC).

  • The hook is a bit weak; can you find anything interesting? And while I'm here, the Tulsa article uses a different source for its 2012 population estimate of 393,987 than the 394,098 in U.S. Route 64 in Oklahoma (ref 16) which is being used here. Why is this incontinuity? Rcsprinter (gossip) @ 22:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)
    • The hook does feature the interesting juxtaposition of passing through the second-largest and the smallest municipalities in the state, which is why I suggested the hook. Other than that, the only other interesting fact about US-64 is that it's the longest US route in Oklahoma. I am afraid that citing that fact would require references to the length of every other US route in the state, so it would be awkward and distract from the article.
As for the discrepancy, it looks like the 394,098 figure was done from the Census Bureau's official 2012 estimation based upon the 2010 Census, while the 393,987 figure is from the results of the American Community Survey, also done by the Census Bureau but based on a separate survey from the 2010 Census. Both figures are ultimately based on Census Bureau sources, and the difference is only 111 people, which is negligible for such a large figure. It could be changed over, but I don't really think there would be much point in doing so. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 01:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
There is a citation on the next sentence that is intended to cover this one (references 4 and 5). The circle actually contains four U.S. highways (US-56, US-64, US-385, and US-412). There is also one state highway (SH-3) that passes through the circle, and another one that begins at the circle but does not enter it (SH-325), but it is probably better to leave this out of the hook to prevent confusion. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 03:40, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
  • That's bad article writing, to be honest, and not supported by your link. --Rschen7754 02:34, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
  • (ec) This would result in two sentences in a row being cited to the same reference. I have always understood this to be poor form, which is backed up by the essay Wikipedia:Citation overkill. Looking at the DYK rule, it says only that the hook has to be cited with an inline citation (which it is), with no mention that it must be immediately after the sentence. It seems clear to me that the spirit of the rule is to ensure that the hook is verifiable, which it is with the current citation placement. —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 02:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
  • The reason it wasn't clear to me is that the following sentence has two cites. Are both also applicable to the sentence in question, or only one? Yoninah (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
  • OK, fair enough. I'm ready to okay this, but DYK rules prevent me from approving my own hook (even if you did tweak it). Could another reviewer complete this nomination, please? Yoninah (talk) 19:01, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Can't see any other problems now. (But add some more images to the article.) Rcsprinter (gossip) @ 21:59, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/U.S._Route_64_in_Oklahoma&oldid=1022580573"