Template:Did you know nominations/Cross-border Terminal, Tijuana International Airport

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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:59, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Tijuana Cross-border Terminal]

(

)

... that the Tijuana Cross-border Terminal will let passengers check in while in the U.S., walk across a bridge over the border, and catch a flight at Tijuana Airport in Mexico?

Article created by Keizers (talk) mostly from material recently written by Rnieders (talk), but which has been added to the article Tijuana International Airport. Nominated by Keizers (talk) at 01:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC).

Article - ~~majority of it copied from another article, and not expanded fivefold as per policy.~~ Interesting material, well sourced and long enough. No obvious copyvio. There is a problem with the Hook - although it is short enough and interesting, the sentence it refers to does not have an inline citation ending it, in the main article as per policy. -LookingYourBest (talk) 11:27, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I have requested help from a DYK admin on the first point of the review, as I realise the text was newly created, just in a different article. -LookingYourBest (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Interesting - I'd say as the text itself was new (created only hours before being shifted), then this is ok I would have thought as the text falls within the seven day period, so I personally would be happy to take the text as new. However I don't feel strongly and am happy to go with consensus. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I'll strike the first problem in that case as it's a very interesting article and subject. The Hook problem still stands, but I imagine this could be easily resolved. Thank you very much for looking in. -LookingYourBest (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Fixed source issue. Keizers (talk) 13:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Problems above resolved. Article looks good to go, although I am a new reviewer and would like a second opinion, and would appreciate any comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LookingYourBest (talk • contribs) 13:38, 18 September 2014‎ (UTC)

By my count, eight of the History paragraphs are completely unsourced, and should have at least one inline source citation in each per DYK requirements. There are also some problems with the article not reflecting the current status of the terminal (which is under construction); for example, the second-to-last paragraph referring to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton—she isn't SoS now, though she was then—and "an expected groundbreaking in late 2013", which is now in the past. I realize this is in a History section, but that means you have to be especially careful with tenses and wording. Note to LookingYourBest: as I think you realized, the "passed" parameter at the top shouldn't be filled out by the reviewer, but by the person who ultimately promotes the nomination (who is always someone other than the reviewer). Thanks for reviewing! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I added sources to the article where missing. (In fact the source material was provided by the original project manager as images, but OK I added the ref tags.) Please have a look again to reconsider.Keizers (talk) 17:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Keizers, thanks for the improvements. However, the second paragraph in the 1989 - Mexicana de Aviacion proposal section is still unreferenced, as is the entire 1996 - Casey Development proposal section. The other issue I mentioned, with the article not reflecting the current state of the terminal, has not been addressed at all. More needs to be done here. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:13, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Completed additional changes, thank you. Keizers (talk) 13:20, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I would like a more experienced DYK reviewer to assess the current state of the hook and article now that it has inline source citations for the paragraphs, and edits have been made to address the tense issues and current state of the terminal. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:42, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Given the ruling above that although this article content was initially written in the article Tijuana International Airport, and thus could be considered a sub-article, this appears to pass the new requirement. Content is most definitely long enough and can be easily rated a C rated article as it stands. As for citing reliable sources, the hook is definitely cited to a reliable source, but the rest of the article leaves readers wanting. Large portions are sparsely cited to reliable sources (several of which are offline (while being on the internet is not a requirement to be a RS, it is preferential)), and thus subject to WP:BURDEN; that being said I will be kind and say that what is there is barely sufficient. Article also appears to be within policy (with my concern already noted about verifiable nature of entire status). Therefore, I would say this would be a weak pass.

Also, if others would take a look at the Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Baguio (1945), that would be appreciated.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:25, 31 October 2014 (UTC)