Template:Did you know nominations/Shrewsbury Road
- 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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:11, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
Shrewsbury Road
[edit]- ... that the most expensive house ever sold in Ireland, Walford (€58million), is located on Shrewsbury Road?
- ALT1:... that Shrewsbury Road in Dublin, Ireland was the 6th most expensive street in the world in 2007?
- Comment: I'm not sure how to include the price in the fist hook so I put it in brackets, should I even?
5x expanded by ShaneMc2010 (talk). Self nom at 19:54, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Date and length check out. Both potential hooks are referenced and the refs back up what is stated.
- Comment:I would remove the Walford and price from the hook as it is listed. maybe try a reword
... that located on Shrewsbury Road is the Walford which once sold for €58million making it the most expensive house ever sold in Ireland?
Review and comment are both anonymous and undated; can those responsible please take responsibility for them? For my own comment, I don't think any of the hooks are well worded, and the one in the Comment is the most problematic. A possible alternative, which eliminates the name of the house (I find it a distraction there, if not confusing, even if it does have its own article section):
- ALT2: ... that Shrewsbury Road in Dublin is the location of the most expensive house ever sold in Ireland, which cost 58 million euros?
- Finally, the article cannot be approved until it is no longer a stub. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:22, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry I forgot to sign the review. I have the article being over 2,600 the rules say it needs to be over 1,500 so is there something I missed? Cheers --Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 02:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the new sig. Yes, I think there may be a few more reviewing details you missed. First, there are two size components at play here: all articles must have a 1500 prose character minimum, but articles that were expansions rather than completely brand new (this article has existed for a few years) must also be expanded to at least five times its former size (in prose characters) in the five days before nomination. This article has also met that requirement, so there's no issue there. Additionally, the article itself has a stub template on it, and the talk page has it rated as a stub. (These probably come from before the recent expansion.) Neither should be the case with an article that's going to be featured on the main page: the submitter should make sure these are taken care of before a final approval is given: the article's stub template needs to be removed, and the talk page's stub evaluation needs to be redone (but not removed).
- I have given the article a light copyedit. One thing I did not do was modify the size of the house, in square meters, or the land it sits on, given in acres. The units should probably be either consistently metric or consistently converted (so both units are given), but I'm leaving that to the author. Let me know if you have any further questions. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- I haven't converted the area of the house and the total area of the property yet as, in Ireland anyway, the size of the actual house is normally given in square foot and the area all together is normally given in acres. (i.e. I only have a conversion beside each one to metre squared to make it consistent) I don't know if this should be left like this or not as I am used to seeing it like this but if it has to be changed to make it clearer, fine by me. I also removed the stub category and left it as unassessed on the talk page so someone with better knowledge than me will know what type class to assess it as. ShaneMc2010 21:48, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- I can't get at the Irish Times sources, but the Guardian source (FN 5, "€43m knocked off") gives the size of the house as 4,000 sq ft, not 546 sq ft (which was given, before recent edits, as 546sqm [square meters?], which seems about equivalent). It also gives the size of the garden as 1.5 acres, which may or may not equate to the entire property being 1.8 acres. I think these discrepancies must be reconciled, and giving at least one source for the house and property sizes is called for under the circumstances. (You can reuse one or more of the existing sources if they work.) Once we get this settled, I believe this article will be ready for a final review. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry for all the confusion, I'm not sue where I got the 546 from but it was wrong anyway! I changed it to 4000sq ft and it turns out in the Guardian Article that the garden just by itself was 1.5 acres. If you're wondering where the 1.6 acres figure is from, its the 1.5 acres and the house area added together (1.5918 acres). Once again sorry for all the confusion. The guardian article contains both the garden and house figure so that reference will suffice for the area at least. ShaneMc2010 18:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think you can add the garden and the house figure together like that. The 4000 sq ft house is typically a measure of floor space, including main floor and any upper floors, not area based on exterior dimensions. The problem with a "garden" measurement is that the property could be larger if you include paths, driveways, garage (if any), etc., though some unknown portion of those may be considered garden. You just can't know. If all you have is "1.5 acre garden" in the source, that's all you can accurately state. Anything beyond that is WP:SYNTH, and not allowed. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:24, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Issues seem to have been addressed; a new reviewer is needed to recheck the article after the recent changes and also to say which of the hooks are supported and interesting. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hook is sourceable and sourced. Rest of article looks in order - generally properties here in Oz go on total area not total area minus house. Hence ref 7 says 1.8 Ha. I would use that as the reference and give the total size as 1.8 Ha.....unless the practice is the other way in Ireland.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:08, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Normally in Ireland the property is given in total area i.e. house + garden, but the source of confusion with this article is that none of the references give the total area, with only one of the reference giving the specific size of the garden as 1.5 acres. I cant seem to find a reference for the total area. ShaneMc2010 17:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, ref 7 says 1.8 acres, not 1.8 hectares (Ha). The quote, which I don't recall being able to see earlier (I think there was a paywall when I checked previously) does say "The Edwardian house on 1.8 acres", which I think should thankfully settle things. Casliber, would you keep the conversion of the acre amount to the current meters square, or do you think hectares is the preferable conversion unit, since it's land? BlueMoonset (talk) 18:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- OH dear/sorry, I meant "acres" - was writing late at night. Acres are still widely used so I'd be happy to leave in imperial units. We can convert readily enough too by dividiing by 2.2 to get hectares or m2 as alternative. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:53, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- It looks like ShaneMc2010 has made the necessary fixes. Casliber, if you're around, does this meet with your approval? Shane, it's important to check in here when you've addressed issues in a DYK, so the reviewer knows to take another look. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:13, 31 January 2013 (UTC)