Template:Did you know nominations/Central Park Conservancy
< Template:Did you know nominations
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Revision as of 14:52, 13 August 2019 by imported>RoySmith (good to go)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Central Park Conservancy
- ... that the Central Park Conservancy has invested more than $800 million toward the restoration and enhancement of New York City's Central Park? Source: Crain's New York
- ALT1:... that a $100-million donation to the Central Park Conservancy in 2012 was the largest ever to New York City's park system at the time? Source: NY Times
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mikhailovsky Garden: Rossi Bridge (2/3)
- Comment:
Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 14:07, 2 August 2019 (UTC).
- New enough (listed as GA August 2nd, submitted the same day)
- Not been in ITN or DYK before
- Is (way more than) long enough
- Has abundant citations
- Both hooks checked for appropriate citations, and in-line cited in article
- The vast majority of references are on-line, in English
- No dispute templates. There is a redlink to The American Institute for Conservation, but that's probably OK.
- Article mentions a large number of living people, but I don't see any WP:BLP issues.
- 16px Earwig calls out a number of issues. Some of them are bloggy-looking things that may well have copied from us. One of the callouts is the NY Times, who certainly didn't copy from us; in that case, it's mostly just a few quotes, which deserve better attribution. There's also some from The Post, which I'm going to be generous and classify as a newspaper rather than a bloggy-looking thing, and we've got some direct copies from there. These should all be investigated deeper.
- No problems with WP:NPOV
- For amusement value only: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Park Conservancy
- The hooks are correctly formatted, interesting, accurate, cited, and neutral.
- There's no image associated with this entry.
I'll leave the hook and image reviews to somebody else.
Could another person look at the hook and image reviews? Thanks. epicgenius (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)- Also, thanks Template:U for doing the first part of the review. I will fix the copyvio concerns, but it looks like the biggest violations are from forums that seem to have reverse copied from the Wikipedia page. epicgenius (talk) 14:27, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
I've got more time now, so I've done the remaining items (added to the list above). -- RoySmith (talk) 13:34, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- Template:Re Thanks. I put the appropriate attribution to the quotes where possible. In the case of the YouTube/blog links, I think they copied from us, rather than the other way around. epicgenius (talk) 00:17, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
I've improved the attribution of the NY Times quote. Looks good to go now. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)