Template talk:Did you know

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
DYK queue status

There are currently 7 filled queues – all good!

Did you know?
Introduction and rules
Introduction and rulesWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
On the Main Page
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Skip to top
Skip to bottom
For instructions on how to nominate an article, see Template:DYK nomination header § Instructions for nominators.
"Template:Did you know nominations" redirects here. For the list of approved nominations, see Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page with a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area and then promoted into the Queue. To update this page, purge it.

Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
December 28 1
January 2 1 1
January 3 2
January 4 1
January 5 1
January 9 1
January 11 1
January 12 1
January 15 2 1
January 17 1
January 20 1
January 23 1
January 25 1
January 27 1
January 29 4 2
January 30 5 2
January 31 6 3
February 1 1 1
February 2 1 1
February 3 3 1
February 4 3
February 5 6 5
February 6 1 1
February 7 2 1
February 9 2
February 10 4 4
February 12 10 7
February 13 2 2
February 14 4 2
February 15 4 4
February 16 5 2
February 17 5 2
February 18 4 3
February 19 6 3
February 20 5 2
February 21 10 10
February 22 8 4
February 23 4 1
February 24 7 4
February 25 6 4
February 26 5 4
February 27 4 3
February 28 5 2
March 1 7 5
March 2 4 1
March 3 6 3
March 4 8 7
March 5 6 3
March 6 7 4
March 7 8 4
March 8 6 1
March 9 3 2
March 10 6 3
March 11 3 1
March 12 6 5
March 13 3
March 14 4 1
March 15 3
March 16 7 2
March 17 11 1
March 18 2
Total 248 125
Last updated 04:47, 18 March 2023 UTC
Current time is 05:01, 18 March 2023 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

Shortcut

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing.

Further information: Official supplementary guidelines and unofficial guide

Nominate an article

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How do I write an interesting hook?

Successful hooks tend to have several traits. Most importantly, they share a surprising or intriguing fact. They give readers enough context to understand the hook, but leave enough out to make them want to learn more. They are written for a general audience who has no prior knowledge of or interest in the topic area. Lastly, they are concise, and do not attempt to cover multiple facts or present information about the subject beyond what's needed to understand the hook.

When will my nomination be reviewed?

This page is often backlogged. As long as your submission is still on the page, it will stay there until an editor reviews it. Since editors are encouraged to review the oldest submissions first, it may take several weeks until your submission is reviewed. In the meantime, please consider reviewing another submission (not your own) to help reduce the backlog (see instructions below).

Where is my hook?

If you can't find the nomination you submitted to this nominations page, it may have been approved and is on the approved nominations page waiting to be promoted. It could also have been added to one of the prep areas, promoted from prep to a queue, or is on the main page.

If the nominated hook is in none of those places, then the nomination has probably been rejected. Such a rejection usually only occurs if it was at least a couple of weeks old and had unresolved issues for which any discussion had gone stale. If you think your nomination was unfairly rejected, you can query this on the DYK discussion page, but as a general rule such nominations will only be restored in exceptional circumstances.


Instructions for reviewers[edit]

Main page: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide

Any editor who was not involved in writing/expanding or nominating an article may review it by checking to see that the article meets all the DYK criteria (long enough, new enough, no serious editorial or content issues) and the hook is cited. Editors may also alter the suggested hook to improve it, suggest new hooks, or even lend a hand and make edits to the article to which the hook applies so that the hook is supported and accurate. For a more detailed discussion of the DYK rules and review process see the supplementary guidelines and the WP:Did you know/Reviewing guide.

To post a comment or review on a DYK nomination, follow the steps outlined below:

  • Look through this page, Template talk:Did you know, to find a nomination you would like to comment on.
  • Click the "Review or comment" link at the top of the nomination. You will be taken to the nomination subpage.
  • The top of the page includes a list of the DYK criteria. Check the article to ensure it meets all the relevant criteria.
  • To indicate the result of the review (i.e., whether the nomination passes, fails, or needs some minor changes), leave a signed comment on the page. Please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed; your comment should look something like the following:

    Article length and age are fine, no copyvio or plagiarism concerns, reliable sources are used. But the hook needs to be shortened.

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING  :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
  • Save the page.
  • After the nomination is approved, a bot will automatically list the nomination page on Template talk:Did you know/Approved.

If there is any problem or concern about a nomination, please consider notifying the nominator by placing {{subst:DYKproblem|Article|header=yes|sig=yes}} on the nominator's talk page.

Advanced procedures[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

At-a-glance instructions on how to promote an approved hook to a Prep area
Check list for nomination review completeness
  1. Select a hook from the approved nominations page that has one of these ticks at the bottom post: Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg.
  2. Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
    • Any outstanding issue following Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol voting keep.svg needs to be addressed before promoting.
  3. Check the article history for any substantive changes since it was nominated or reviewed.
  4. Images for the lead slot must be freely licensed. Fair-use images are not permitted. Images loaded on Commons that appear on the Main Page are automatically protected by KrinkleBot.
  5. Hook must be stated in both the article and source (which must be cited at the end of the article sentence where stated).
  6. Hook should make sense grammatically.
  7. Try to vary subject matters within each prep area.
  8. Try to select a funny, quirky or otherwise upbeat hook for the last or bottom hook in the set.
Steps to add a hook to prep
  • In one tab, open the nomination page of the hook you want to promote.
  • In a second tab, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.

Wanna skip all this fuss? Install WP:PSHAW instead! Does most of the heavy lifting for ya :)

  1. For hooks held for specific dates, refer to "Local update times" section on DYK Queue.
    • Completed Prep area number sets will be promoted by an administrator to corresponding Queue number.
  2. Copy and paste the hook into a chosen slot.
    • Make sure there's a space between ... and that, and a ? at the end.
    • Check that there's a bold link to the article.
  3. If it's the lead (first) hook, paste the image where indicated at the top of the template.
  4. Copy and paste ALL the credit information (the {{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}} templates) at the bottom
  5. Check your work in the prep's Preview mode.
    • At the bottom under "Credits", to the right of each article should have the link "View nom subpage" ; if not, a subpage parameter will need to be added to the DYKmake.
  6. Save the Prep page.
Closing the DYK nomination page
  1. At the upper left
    • Change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
    • Change |passed= to |passed=yes
  2. At the bottom
    • Just above the line containing

      }}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.-->

      insert a new, separate line containing one of the following:
      To [[T:DYK/P1|Prep 1]]
      To [[T:DYK/P2|Prep 2]]
      To [[T:DYK/P3|Prep 3]]
      To [[T:DYK/P4|Prep 4]]
      To [[T:DYK/P5|Prep 5]]
      To [[T:DYK/P6|Prep 6]]
      To [[T:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]
    • Also paste the same thing into the edit summary.
  3. Check in Preview mode. Make sure everything is against a pale blue background (nothing outside) and there are no stray characters, like }}, at the top or bottom.
  4. Save.

For more information, please see T:TDYK#How to promote an accepted hook.

Handy copy sources: To [[T:DYK/P1|Prep 1]] To [[T:DYK/P2|Prep 2]] To [[T:DYK/P3|Prep 3]] To [[T:DYK/P4|Prep 4]] To [[T:DYK/P5|Prep 5]] To [[T:DYK/P6|Prep 6]] To [[T:DYK/P7|Prep 7]]

How to remove a rejected hook[edit]

  • Open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to remove. (It's best to wait several days after a reviewer has rejected the hook, just in case someone contests or the article undergoes a large change.)
  • In the window where the DYK nomination subpage is open, replace the line {{DYKsubpage with {{subst:DYKsubpage, and replace |passed= with |passed=no. Then save the page. This has the effect of wrapping up the discussion on the DYK nomination subpage in a blue archive box and stating that the nomination was unsuccessful, as well as adding the nomination to a category for archival purposes.

How to remove a hook from the prep areas or queue[edit]

  • Edit the prep area or queue where the hook is and remove the hook and the credits associated with it.
  • Go to the hook's nomination subpage (there should have been a link to it in the credits section).
    • View the edit history for that page
    • Go back to the last version before the edit where the hook was promoted, and revert to that version to make the nomination active again.
    • Add a new icon on the nomination subpage to cancel the previous tick and leave a comment after it explaining that the hook was removed from the prep area or queue, and why, so that later reviewers are aware of this issue.
  • Add a transclusion of the template back to this page so that reviewers can see it. It goes under the date that it was first created/expanded/listed as a GA. You may need to add back the day header for that date if it had been removed from this page.
  • If you removed the hook from a queue, it is best to either replace it with another hook from one of the prep areas, or to leave a message at WT:DYK asking someone else to do so.

How to move a nomination subpage to a new name[edit]

  • Don't; it should not ever be necessary, and will break some links which will later need to be repaired. Even if you change the title of the article, you don't need to move the nomination page.

Nominations[edit]

Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on December 28[edit]

Alchymic Quartet

(
)
Andrew Szydlo presenting chemical experimants
Andrew Szydlo presenting chemical experimants

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 15:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Ready to approve once QPQ completed.  Ploni💬  00:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the quick review. I reviewed now Template:Did you know nominations/Ariana Orrego. Perhaps the image could be cropped? GRuban? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 00:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Updated! Cropping it would be an improvement.  Ploni💬  01:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Finally: I got it cropped thanks to GRuban, Ploni. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:52, 2 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good to go!  Ploni💬  02:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Gerda Arendt: loving the hook, but it's a bit unclear to me. Was it intended to be played regularly during the teacher's experiments? If so, can the article be updated to match? And when the article says He won Szydlo to not only come for the celebration of his 60th birthday, but also give a speech at the main concert, I don't understand what "won" means. Was there a contest? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:05, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Last first: in German, you can "jemanden für eine Aufgabe gewinnen", and it didn't occur to me as an idiom, sorry. Deepl tells me it's "to win someone over to a task". Would that be good enough or is there a better phrase for it? It was a major trip for Szydlo, so having the experiments on the side was ideal, but will be rare, beginning with not happening the following day, when the chemist sat in the audience after his speech and was the first to stand for the ovation (pictured). Music is often inspired by something but can be meaningfully performed without the something. The same composer wrote a piece inspired by a painting, but you don't have to know the painting, or by concentric phenomena, as you will remember. - This hook would be most meaningful on 28 Februar 2023, his mother's 90th birthday. She sat next to Szydlo but didn't rise as fast. (But I hate to ask favours ;) - I love GRuban's pic cropping, better later than no pic.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol question.svg Hook needs revision per discussion above. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Didn't I explain? Help wording, please? We could say "meant to be played", "intended ...", "ideally ...", or say that the first time (on 4 Nov), that actually happened? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
when i first read this hook, i admittedly had thought waterhouse had written the music for his teacher to play in the background while he was conducting research. i didn't realize i had read it incorrectly until now, so thanks for bringing this up, theleekycauldron. the article suggests to me that the composition was written to be ideally performed alongside the chemical experiments, although the experiments themselves aren't strictly required for the performance. would replacing "to be played during" with "written to be performed alongside" or "written to be accompanied by" resolve this ambiguity?
regarding the use of "won", would replacing it with "convinced" or "persuaded" be appropriate? note that both words suggest that the performer did not immediately agree to the task when it was requested of them, but i am not sure if the german idiom conveys the same meaning. (i imagine "convinced" is more applicable to this situation, as i personally feel that "persuaded" may suggest a more antagonistic relationship between the two, which, i assume, is not the case here.) Gerda, does this translation seem accurate to you? on the contrary, if szydlo readily agreed to perform, perhaps replacing "He won Szydlo ... his 60th birthday" with "Szydlo agreed ... Waterhouse's 60th birthday" would work.
as an aside, english does have the expression "win over", but i think its use often suggests that the party persuaded was initially opposed to the proposition. dying (talk) 10:26, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for a valuable English lesson. For the hook, I propose your suggestion:
ALT0a: ... that the Alchymic Quartet is a string quartet by Graham Waterhouse, to be performed alongside chemical experiments of Andrew Szydlo (pictured), his former teacher at Highgate School?
"win" - I understand that "win over" is not appropriate, by your explanation, but the other two also seem to suggest too much of reluctance that had to be overcome. The image in the program book, and what Szydlo said, speak of closeness over all these years, but it was still a big deal for him to not only make the trip, but also arrange for the experiments, and speak the lauding words (in German, and he said: "I learned German for three years to speak in German." - You can hear it in the video), and be the first to stand afterwards right after the final note, initiating the standing ovations. What can English do to say so? "achieved"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:39, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
oh, that's a difficult question, Gerda. offhand, i can't think of any one english word that encompasses what you wish to describe. i think the word "enlist" might be close, as its frequent use in military contexts may suggest that szydlo's efforts were not trivial, but it similarly suggests that szydlo may have preferred to not perform at all. in any case, since i couldn't find the additional nuance you mentioned in the cited sources, i wouldn't worry too much about trying to include it in the article; i think your current wording, stating that szydlo was invited and came to perform and give a speech, is sufficient if theleekycauldron finds it agreeable. dying (talk) 11:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 2[edit]

Articles created/expanded on January 3[edit]

Buchanan's Station

(
)
19th century view of the site; the log building on the right is a remnant of the 1780s fort.[1]
19th century view of the site; the log building on the right is a remnant of the 1780s fort.[1]

Created by GenQuest (talk). Self-nominated at 21:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Article was new enough at nomination, is long enough, is well source, and is neutral. In terms of plagiarism - there is some close phrasing in the image caption that earwig picked up - it would be good if that could change. Additionally, the image caption is too long for a DYK, so please could it be shortened? Lajmmoore (talk) 14:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lajmmoore: These concerns have been addressed, Thank you. GenQuest "scribble" 16:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Lajmmoore: Please let me know what more is needed to pass this? Thanks, GenQuest "scribble" 00:55, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GenQuest: thanks for the reminder, caption and editing request are fulfilled Lajmmoore (talk) 12:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Hawkeye7: Could you please take a quick look at this article from a WikiProject Military History point of view? First of all, is it misnamed per WikiProject convention (i.e., should it be "Battle of Buchanan's Station" or similar)? Any other adjustments needed to conform to basic MH standards? (Thought of Kevin1776 because of Tecumseh but seems to be offline these days.) Cielquiparle (talk) 03:56, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The article is fine. I have reassessed it as B class. The article naming seems okay. I don't know much about the place/period. @Hog Farm: might know more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The name is fine, since the article discusses the stockade itself besides just the battle that took place there. Ideally there'd be some coverage of the period between the battle and whenever the stockade was abandoned in the article, but that's not always covered by sources. Unfortunately, I don't have time right now to dig into this article or sources for it much. Hog Farm Talk 07:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have added additional information to the article to address the period between the battle and the sale of the property. Thanks, GenQuest "scribble" 18:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol question.svg Thanks to Hawkeye7 and Hog Farm for reviewing, and to GenQuest for updating per comments. I would like to make ALT1 work somehow, but the issue I'm having is that the source says "a mere fifteen sharpshooters" in the body text while acknowledging in the footnote that other sources say as many as twenty – would it be possible to address this detail somehow in the article either with an explanatory endnote and/or finding and adding one of the other sources that says 20? The other issue I had was that I wasn't able to verify that Talitoskee was leading – it feels like maybe one of your sources accidentally got deleted or dropped – so could you please go through that section and fix as well? Cielquiparle (talk) 16:03, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cielquiparle I believe all your objections have been met. Can this get passed now? GenQuest "scribble" 06:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is anyone looking at this anymore? GenQuest "scribble" 18:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GenQuest: I'm having trouble verifying the claim that Talitoskee was leading the raid on Buchanan's Station. Which source says that? Cielquiparle (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cielquiparle I've removed the offending statement. GenQuest "scribble" 07:30, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks GenQuest! Cielquiparle (talk) 12:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @GenQuest: Upon further review, this article still needs more work. For example, the paragraph on John Buchanan arriving in 1780 with his nineteen-year-old wife isn't right (and it doesn't say that in the cited source at the end of paragraph either). I'm now working on the biography for Sally Buchanan which will hopefully help to clear up certain issues, but this is indeed a very challenging story to tell, as there is so much conflicting information (the time period and region make it difficult). I am committed to helping to get Buchanan's Station over the line as a co-author (not as a reviewer or promoter). I would also be open to a joint DYK submission with Sally Buchanan called out in the hook. Regardless, let's get all the facts in both articles fixed first. (I will be focusing on Sally's for the next couple of days, as I fully expect it will evolve significantly as I comb through and cross-reference each claim.) Cielquiparle (talk) 10:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GenQuest: I think it's fine to seek a second opinion. I would just ask that the next reviewer please be sure to go through and verify each claim line by line, because there were a lot of problems previously, per the discussion above, with failed verification. I will also go through now and mark exactly where I am still finding conflicts. I am also happy to help fix these issues for you. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:27, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle: You're looking at the wrong things, especially in an case for DYK. There is conflicting info, but it was cited info; and such details can be worked out on its way to a Good Article status. As long as the hooks are duly cited, and other criteria is met, and the rest isn't complete BS, that is what DYK is for. Quick and easy as in the past. These have been painful enough to put me off ever subjesting myself to this procedure again. I've reviewed at least eight or nine articles myself. I know how it works.
The pertinent criteria are:
The hook fact(s) must be stated in the article, and must be immediately followed by an inline citation to a reliable source. This rule applies even when a citation would not be required for the purposes of the article;
(Once again, that rule is only for the hook fact, not for every sentence in the article...)
The article in general should use inline cited sources. A rule of thumb for DYK is a minimum of one citation per paragraph, possibly excluding the introduction, plot summaries, and paragraphs which summarize information that's cited elsewhere.
If you want to go through and add new data, that's fine, but should not hold up the DYK process in the meantime. Thanks for your help, BTW. Regards, GenQuest "scribble" 20:52, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ referenced

John Hoke III

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Cl3phact0 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

    • Comment: Not sure why the article appears as a redlink. (It does exist.) (fixed)
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol question.svg A worthwhile bio. Although it's not very long, it's more than just a resume. Hook is interesting and fully substantiated by the only source I needed to look at. As usual, I've done some (very) minor copyediting. Needs a QPQ if the author is not exempt. Otherwise ready to go. Bahnfrend (talk) 05:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Bahnfrend, I may have left my response to yours (re: QPQ) in the wrong place. Just in case, I'll summarize what I said here (apologies for the repetition if it's redundant): Thanks for reviewing the John Hoke article. I will read QPQ, and if eligible I'll gladly oblige. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 21:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Re: QPQ eligibility, please see additional response here. Thank you, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol confirmed.svg Cl3phact0 Sorry about the very slow response. I have a lot of other things on my mind. I confirm that you're exempt from QPQ. Ready to go. Bahnfrend (talk) 06:08, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment. This article cannot be promoted until all the "clarification needed" tags have been resolved. Cielquiparle (talk) 14:04, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bahnfrend and Cl3phact0: Symbol question.svg per Cielquiparle's notes. Also, the hook can't contain parenthetical comments. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:08, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: Thanks for your help! Re: Hoke "Hook" (ehem), would this wording work:
Re: Cielquiparle's comment concerning the "clarification needed" tags (which were placed by me) — these concern details of temporal minutia which I had hoped someone might clarify in the interim (respectively: whether he joined Nike in '92 or '93; and if he was 12 or 13 when he, rather cheekily, wrote to the company's CEO proposing a design concept). I will try to locate a definitive source and update (the Time Sensitive ref seems to answer this, but it's in Hoke's own words, so I wasn't sure vis-à-vis WP:RS). Alternatively, could the tags be replaced with {{Better source needed}} or {{Fact}} tags instead (or simply removed given the relatively minor nature of the discrepancy)? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Works for me, but I'll leave the final tick to Cielquiparle :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC) (oy, 'Cielquiparle' is a hard name to shorten. If you have a preference, that'd be helpful.)Reply[reply]
@Cl3phact0: This is an important bio – excellent addition to Wikipedia. Appreciate that you found a lot of good sources. The fact that you are a self-tagger also demonstrates attention to detail. I have now rearranged some of the content on the page to conform more or less to standard Wikipedia biography format (of which there is quite a range). I have also expanded the "Early life and education" section to resolve the tag you had there, and added an explanatory notes section where you can discuss any discrepancies between sources. (I used the efn template in visual editor.) As for next steps to get this article in shape for the main page: 1) Careers section. What are the main highlights of Hoke's career at Nike per the sources? Not convinced they are captured in the article yet. 2) Sources. Please make sure you are familiar with WP:BLP and specifically WP:BLPSOURCES. I have already removed a couple of sources for various reasons (e.g., one was simply republishing another), but please note that quality of sources matters more than quantity, and there may be other sources you can go ahead and "cull" if they are likely to trigger the BLP police which does NOT tolerate blogs as sources for BLPs, or if they just repeat what other sources say. For this reason as well, it's good to fill out as much of the ref form as you can (e.g., include the author, etc.), so that people know what the actual source is (sometimes you have to read the fine print to understand where the content actually originated). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, Cielquiparle. Very helpful advice and counsel. The article is much improved by your contributions. The anecdote about the pool raft is great too! I wonder if Nike put him on the patent application as the inventor, or co-inventor, or something? That would be interesting information. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 08:12, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS: I have a technical question about the efn template which I'll put on your Talk page, if anyone's interested in these things.
PPS: Thank you also for introducing me to the term "self-tagger" (a practice which seemed self-evident to me, but I gather not to everyone).
@Theleekycauldron: Is it okay to edit the Hoke Hook directly in this thread (i.e., replace the original with the version sans-parenthesis), or is there a different/better way this should be done? Thanks, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:24, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cl3phact0: Standard practice is usually to, on a neẇline, suggest an ALT0a ('ALT' meaning "alternate hook", '0a' meaning "slight modification on ALT0"). See Template:Did you know nominations/Claudia Riner for an example on how that's done :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done (see above). Thank you, theleekycauldron. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 05:50, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cielquiparle, theleekycauldron, what is currently holding up this nomination? Are there issues with ALT0a? Should I be calling for a new reviewer? Thanks for your help in getting this moving forward again. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Calling for a new reviewer. Cielquiparle (talk) 16:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 4[edit]

Northeastern Army

(
)
Chiang Kai-shek and Northeastern General Zhang Xueliang
Chiang Kai-shek and Northeastern General Zhang Xueliang

5x expanded by SilverStar54 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:09, 8 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @SilverStar54: Good article. However

  • "In early 1927, the forces of the NPA engaged the National Revolutionary Army (NRA) in Henan and Jiangsu." Needs a citation
  • "and on 17 October, Yu Zhishan surrendered Eastern Liaoning to the Japanese." Needs a citation
  • Other notable commanders list should probably be cited.

If you can fix that then I'll pass. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hopefully this is the right spot to respond (first time in the DYK process), but thank you for the quick review. I've revised the article to add sources (or remove unsourced material) where you requested. Let me know if there's any further steps I should take. SilverStar54 (talk) 07:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol voting keep.svg Forgot to promote. Hope to see more expansions about the warlord era. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:24, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SilverStar54: Symbol question.svg could you point as to where in the article we're going with "kidnapping", rather than detainment? Also, where could I find the bit about convincing him to join the second united front? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 09:13, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: I feel that either term could be used to describe the events, I chose "kidnapping" just because it's more eye-catching for a hook. Do you feel like that's too much of a creative liberty? About the Second United Front, thank you for pointing that out. I describe it, but I never actually included a link to the Second United Front in that section (fixed now). It's what I'm describing in these two sentences: "By the end of the negotiations, Chiang had verbally promised to end the civil war, to resist the Japanese together, and to invite Zhou to Nanjing for further talks. Although he publicly renounced his promises after being released, he quietly followed through on them over the following months." I think that more detail about the Second United Front would be tangential to the article, but I could add more about the negotiations. SilverStar54 (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SilverStar54: I'd say that "kidnapping" probably has connotations we couldn't back up, but I could be wrong. When you say "join the Second United Front", you don't mean as a card-carrying member? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: I guess I feel that "kidnapping" connotates illegally seizing a person, whereas "detaining" implies a legal or official action, such as by the police. This was done by an army, but their actions were perceived as illegal (at least by the Nanjing government). Perhaps "took hostage" works better?
I'm a bit confused by what you mean by "as a card-carrying member". The Second United Front wasn't a political party that you could be a member of, it was just an alliance between the CCP and the KMT to resist the Japanese. Chiang denied that he was bound by his verbal promise to create such an alliance after he was released, but gradually eased hostilities and eventually did sign an official alliance with the Communists after six months of continued negotiations. For political reasons the KMT framed this as a "surrender" by the CCP, but in reality it was an alliance. I'll try to rewrite that section to make it more clear. SilverStar54 (talk) 05:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not sure if they want any changes or not. SilverStar54 (talk) 21:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SilverStar54: the clarifying changes for that section would be welcome :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: Just made some more edits. Please take a look at my most recent revision and let me know what parts still need more detail or clarification. SilverStar54 (talk) 19:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 5[edit]

Untitled The Last of Us game

(
)

Information icon This was originally a triple nomination, but has been split into three separate nominations. The other two are Template:Did you know nominations/The Last of Us (franchise) and Template:Did you know nominations/The Last of Us: Escape the Dark. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moved to mainspace by Rhain (talk). Self-nominated at 04:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

All three articles:

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Epicgenius (talk) 14:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Rhain and Epicgenius: Symbol question.svg I'm a bit uneasy about both of these hooks; I'm sure it's not intentional, but having nothing to say about media franchises other than "they exist" or "coming soon" sounds a bit like advertising to me. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Theleekycauldron: Definitely a valid concern, but I'm struggling to think of an interesting, concise hook using all three articles. Should this nomination be split into separate hooks, or refocused on one of the articles? (I'm not bothered if refocusing on one makes the other two ineligible for now; they can always be re-nominated upon 5× expansion or GA.) – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:59, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Well, I don't think we'd be losing eligibility on any of the articles. Opening up new nominations for each of the other articles is efficient, but probably a little cumbersome. I'd say that it'd be messier, but we can probably get by if you just propose separate new hooks down here and have them all reviewed and promoted into separate preps. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I think proposing separate hooks is probably the best option; I've done that below. Please feel free to adjust my formatting as much as is necessary. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 05:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg @Rhain: Good article. Though I will agree with Narutolovehinata5 that hooks alt1 and alt2 are to Naughty Dog specific to be appealing but I find alt0 alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol delete vote.svg@Rhain and Onegreatjoke: Per the discussion of the DYK nomination for The Last of Us: Escape the Dark, I recommend withdrawing this nomination, as it's simply WP:TOOSOON for an article on the main page since the game is untitled and has not been released yet. Once the game is available, we should be able to cite reviews in independent secondary sources; at the moment, we are overly reliant on the vendor's own claims about this work in progress. No prejudice if/when this article is resubmitted for DYK when it reaches GA. Cielquiparle (talk) 08:34, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 9[edit]

Jamie Beaton (entrepreneur)

(
)

Created by MaxnaCarta (talk). Self-nominated at 23:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Happy to review this one; I've always had an interest in this guy as a young Kiwi entrepreneur and "tall poppy", and was impressed by the article and how well-written/neutral it is. Article is new enough, long enough, well-cited and has no other eligibility problems. No issues from Earwig check. QPQ appears to not be required as your second DYK nomination (although please let me know if I've got that wrong!).
  • The hook is interesting and cited. I note I don't have access to the provided source for the hook as it requires a subscription. I can approve it on an AGF basis but wondered if you could provide me with the wording of the text supporting the hook? (I just want to check that it says this definitively, rather than being simply a claim by Beaton.)
  • Some minor comments:
    • Suggest just 'New Zealand' instead of 'New Zealand born'.
    • I think these sentences in the lead might fit better in the body of the article in the 'Early life' section: "The son of property managers, Beaton was born and raised in Auckland where for the first 7 years of his secondary education he attended Saint Kentigern School, then completing the final four years at King's College on an academic scholarship.[1] He was the valedictorian of King's College on graduation.[2]"
    • Per MOS:LEADREL, any significant information in the lead should usually be covered in the remainder of the article. I think details about his Harvard degree and that he completed it in only three years fits in this category.
    • I'm not sure the two images used in the article add much value or are significant enough to Beaton himself, and I would personally probably not include them, bearing in mind MOS:PERTINENCE.
  • Thanks again for your great work on this article, and hope all of the above makes sense. Only the request for the text supporting the hook is really critical to me approving the nomination. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 04:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Comment. Both the hook and the article have neutrality issues. The source used is a book review that repeats an assertion from Beaton. The world's top 25 universities according to whom? Beaton's business is university preparation; I don't think it's appropriate to repeat this claim in Wikipedia's own voice as it virtually amounts to free advertising. A further claim in the article about Beaton's degrees is totally unsourced. The article also includes several other promotional assertions about Crimson's business. ITBF (talk) 13:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @ITBF: Thanks for your comments! I have added a source for the further claim in the article about his degrees, and done some other tweaks based on sources. As noted, I wanted to check the source wording for the hook before approving, but given that I took a different view on the article's neutrality, I'm going to suggest that a second reviewer be required once the issues I raised have been addressed.
      • @MaxnaCarta: apologies and hope the above is still helpful. I also note that it might be worth double-checking that the degrees listed in the infobox are covered by the sources in the article. Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 20:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Have found another source for the hook quote, and suggest slight rewording:
ALT0a: ... that New Zealand entrepreneur Jamie Beaton applied to 25 of the top-ranking universities in the world and received an offer from each? Source: "He had actually applied to 25 of the world's highest-ranked universities, and all had said yes." BBC News
Appreciate this doesn't resolve all your concerns, ITBF. Chocmilk03 (talk) 03:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chocmilk03: thanks for the work you did! I think the hook is perfectly appropriate. It is neutral. Not neutral would be "Jamie Beaton achieved the astounding feat of applying to wonderful universities and this makes him special". That he applied to 25 of the worlds top 25 universities is a fact that has been repeated by multiple reliable sources. Now that you sourced the BBC, a perennially reliable source, the hook is appropriate. Regarding "free advertising", I disagree with that premise. Advertising means describing or drawing attention to a product in a public medium in order to promote sales. "In order" is the key word here. Beaton has primarily become notable on the back of his company. Hence, a description of his business empire and what it offers is essential in writing a complete article about him. This may well have the side effect of drawing attention to his business, but the same could be said for an article on a phone that describes its products and features. I have not given undue weight to the business, remained neutral, and also mentioned the legal issues the business has faced. On balance, I see no violation of WP:NOT. @ITBF:, does this address your concerns? If you have any concerns, please could you identify a solution that would address them? I've been on a break for a wee while so haven't got round to applying. Hopefully this is now okay to proceed. Thanks all! MaxnaCarta (talk) 00:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Article is ready for a second reviewer for ALT0a. My assessment as first reviewer was that the article was appropriately neutral, and I remain of this view. I've just made some other amendments to the article (hope you don't mind MaxnaCarta!) to address my concerns above about the lead and because on review there were a few other points that I felt could be stated in a more neutral way (e.g. to say "Crimson states that it does X" instead of "Crimson does X"). Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 02:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chocmilk03: thanks! Of course I don't mind lol. I do not own the article, and if it did, you're doing my work for me ^_^. Hopefully ITBF will be the seconder if they can. I'm still gonna work through your issues mentioned regardless of the nom, eventually to get it to GA standard. It's probably a way off that though and I'm prioritising another article for GA atm. Cheers for the feedback. All to do is wait now. I hope you are safe and nowhere near Auckland...MaxnaCarta (talk) 03:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think some more attribution as to whom thinks these are the top 25 would be helpful in the hook. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: The source itself says this. Not sure "according to the Australian" would help? Maybe we could change it to "25 of the world's top universities"? Because it is true that the top 25 varies depending on list. Thoughts? I'm open to any suggestions!. @Chocmilk03: any ideas from you? MaxnaCarta (talk) 01:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
...This is actually already the alternative hook already I guess.MaxnaCarta (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 11[edit]

Acorn System BASIC

(
)
Hermann Hauser uses Atom BASIC at the BBC Micro 30th anniversary.
Hermann Hauser uses Atom BASIC at the BBC Micro 30th anniversary.
  • ... that the Acorn System BASIC programming language was so non-standard that one programmer suggested using it on the BBC Micro "would be a disaster"? Source: New Scientist
    • Reviewed: Liu Zhaohua ‎

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 15:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg I do like the hook fact here but it seems to have maybe one too many links? I'd probably suggest that the hook be reworded to focus mainly on the "non-standard = disaster" mention as I feel the other mentions are a bit distracting. Also, the hook is speaking in Wikivoice when in fact it was a quote from a third-party, so the quote needs to have some kind of attribution or clarification. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Disagree with the issue of too many links (three, really?) but in the interest of moving this one on, the changes to the hook have been made. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:06, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There were recent discussions at WT:DYK discouraging too many links in a hook as they could lead traffic away to the article subject. One additional thing: I've read the hook, and while I understand that the hook does say "programmer", I would suggest rewording the hook to note that Acorn System BASIC is a programming language, for the benefit of our less techy readers. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Done and done. Of course, it would seem we should link programming language... Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you. I have to admit that the article is quite technical and I may not be the best person to review the text and sourcing, so I'd like to ask for help from another editor here. For what it's worth, the article does meet DYK requirements and a QPQ has been provided, although the article and/or hook may need adjusting as the article merely gives the quote but doesn't explicitly attribute it to a programmer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I took a look at this. My one comment was going to be that Bill Tagg is described only as "head of Hertfordshire County Council's advisory unit on computer eduction" not specifically that he is/was a programmer, but I see that User:Narutolovehinata5 beat me to that! Other than that one issue, I don't see any problems. Just come up with a new hook which toes closer to what the source actually says and this will be fine. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 12[edit]

Svante Thunberg

(
)

New article on redirect by Moonraker (talk). Self-nominated at 09:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

  • Frankly, who cares about anything like that, about anyone? Tabloid garbage. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Clearly not you, SergeWoodzing! It has some impact. But please feel free to suggest something else. Moonraker (talk) 08:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS Also see recent questionable activity in the article's edit history, the article's talk page and the nominator's talk page. SergeWoodzing (talk) 04:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do see some, but not by me. Moonraker (talk) 18:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nominator has now drawn h own fantasy picture of Thunberg and uploaded it to Commons in another attempt to push this through. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is your take on it, SergeWoodzing, but I have indeed, although very few images are used, and it makes no difference to whether a nomination is “pushed through”. Please see WP:Civility. I see you have not suggested a better hook yet. Moonraker (talk) 00:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WP:Civility is irrelevant when nothing uncivil has been done. SergeWoodzing (talk) 00:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See above. Moonraker (talk) 01:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If nothing else, this hook is primarily about Ernman, not Thunberg; I would probably object to its approval and airing. Moonraker, is there another hook that could be found? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 01:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is about both of them, Theleekycauldron, and I can’t see any rule at Wikipedia:Did you know#The hook that says the subject needs to be the main focus, or has to be the doer and not the done-to. We seem to get a lot of hooks that your comment could rule out. Is there a bullet point in that rule you have in mind? Moonraker (talk) 04:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moonraker: The subject needing to be the main focus is one of the more unwritten rules – come to think it, probably a good addition for the supplementary guidelines. The idea behind it is that narrowing the focus of the hook to the bolded article prevents hooks from being a vehicle for nominators to put whatever they want on the Main Page. We can ask at WT:DYK, if you'd like. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:13, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Theleekycauldron, the whole purpose of having written rules is so that people know what they need to comply with, and the judgement can be done consistently and objectively. Having unwritten rules means life is far harder for all of us, and there is less consistency. The main focus thing may be a good idea, but I would suggest getting agreement to build that into the rules we all work with. And here, Thunberg is not exactly incidental to events! Moonraker (talk) 05:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Theleekycauldron, does ALT2 overcome your possible objection? Moonraker (talk) 05:56, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As a matter of fact, Moonraker, that's exactly what WP:DYKSG was meant to be when it was created – DYK develops so many "unwritten rules" that we eventually had to start, well, writing them down. ALT2 is more centered around Thunberg, but now I'm a little worried about it coming across as tabloid-y? Like, there's a lot of people who would judge a couple who got pregnant without getting married after just two months, and I'm worried that we'd look like we're catering to those people. Obviously, there's nothing even remotely about that in the rules, but if you'd be open to workshopping with me, some editorial discretion can't hurt. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • i am a little concerned about whether the image provided could be seen as a derivative of this image. i can't seem to figure out the copyright status of the latter image, though it appears to have been taken during a press conference at cop24. also, i thought i might submit a proposal centered on svante rather than ernman.

    alt1: ... that Svante Thunberg admitted that he "didn't have a clue about the climate", but changed his behaviour, not to "save the climate, [but] to save [his] child"?

    Moonraker, does this hook seem appropriate? of course, i'll defer to any hooks you'd prefer to propose. dying (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC) [struck alt1. dying (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)]Reply[reply]

Hi, Dying, your image is a photo, and I imagine the copyright belongs to someone who took it. This is a drawing and the copyright is mine. I see no problem with alt1, that was an interesting comment I found and added after creating the nomination. Not sure if you are acting as a reviewer here? If you are, I believe the reviewer needs to check all hooks and say if they are within the rules, someone else later decides which is the best one to go with. Moonraker (talk) 04:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS: in your alt1, the square brackets are awkward, but you could lose them if you also took out the quotation marks. I don’t know that it’s about changing behaviour, what Thunberg says is “I did all these things ... to save my child”. You would need to find a form of words to cover it. Moonraker (talk) 05:10, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moonraker, the image is clearly either based on that photo, or on a photo or video taken around that time. although you may have modified the original to an extent that the derivative work may be copyrightable, i believe you would still need permission from the copyright holder of the underlying work in order to use this image on the main page. (commons has a page explaining how the laws on derivative works apply to files uploaded to commons.) in any case, i think the point is no longer relevant, considering Legoktm's overriding blp point.
i wasn't sure what exactly "all these things" referred to, but the wording i used is based on the bbc source's phrase "her parents' changes in behaviour", and i believe it is noncommittal enough to avoid being wrong. (i had originally thought about using a phrase like "supported his daughter" before i realized that the bbc source didn't appear to explicitly state this.) i'm not attached to the wording, though, and would be happy to replace it with a better alternative. i had used quotation marks to be able to use svante's construction, but if the square brackets are too distracting, here's an alternative.

alt1b: ... that Svante Thunberg admitted that he "didn't have a clue about the climate", but changed his behaviour, not out of concern for the environment, but out of concern for his daughter Greta?

if alt0 or alt2 ends up being accepted and you prefer it over either alt1 or alt1b, i can strike both alt1 and alt1b so that a promoter does not have to decide; i had only proposed alt1 in case alt0 was going to be rejected.
my comment wasn't originally meant as a full review, but i don't mind doing one for you. however, i just noticed that although the article was created from a redirect, the redirect was created as the result of an afd nomination, meaning that another article had existed before the current one. as a result, i do not know enough about the finer points of dyk to determine if this article meets the newness requirement, so am pinging theleekycauldron for help. dying (talk) 08:44, 18 January 2023 (UTC) [struck alt1b. dying (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)]Reply[reply]
I'd say that if consensus previously decided that the topic wasn't fit for a standalone article, and that consensus has now shifted, that counts as new. I think we've come across this at WT:DYK a couple of times, and no one's bothered to write down a rule, but we usually err towards lettin' 'em have it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sounds good. thanks, theleekycauldron. Moonraker, let me know if you would like for me to review the nomination with alt2, or if you would rather me wait while you work with theleekycauldron to develop another hook. dying (talk) 14:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg ALT1'll need its own review. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have removed the image from the article and would also strongly recommend it be removed from this hook too. It's a BLP violation to claim that's what they look like, when they don't look like that! I think it's also close to running afoul of Wikipedia:No_original_research#Original_images. Legoktm (talk) 07:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Legoktm, I don’t know that it matters very much, but I am very puzzled by your claim of a “BLP violation”. We have Dying saying the image is clearly based on a photo — in fact it isn’t, but that seems to be saying it’s a good likeness — and we have you saying “they don't look like that”. Are you saying that no one living can be represented by anything except a photo, or that this drawing is not good enough? Moonraker (talk) 12:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moonraker, i agree with Legoktm. the image somewhat resembles svante, but i do not believe it is accurate enough to portray him on the main page without worrying about blp concerns. what made it clear that the image is based on either photo or video taken at the cop24 press conference is how the image depicts svante with similar folds on his shirt, a similar lanyard, and what appears to be a similar microphone clip.
please note that i did not state that you were conscious of the image being based on either a photo or video taken at the press conference when you created it, but merely that it was based on such media. it's possible that you worked off of a photo of a photo taken at that conference, but then your work would have still been based on the original photo. if you have the appropriate rights for the underlying work, then my worries about copyright would be assuaged, but you don't seem to be asserting that. alternatively, i suppose you could have been personally present at the conference and then created this image from memory, but that is admittedly rather difficult to believe.
by the way, the image you recently uploaded to commons of edda göring bears a striking resemblance to a still from a television interview in 1986. dying (talk) 14:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dying, I agree with you about the Edda image, but not the Thunberg one. The microphone clip, sure. Moonraker (talk) 06:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The nomination cannot be promoted to the image slot if the relevant image isn't in the article, so that'll have to be worked out one way or another. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 08:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Theleekycauldron, I agree, the image needs to be in the article. If it isn’t there, this could only be promoted without it. Moonraker (talk) 12:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd be happy to review ALT1 or ALT1b, by the way, they seem good at first glance. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
theleekycauldron, I have come across reviewers who say they have a preference between hooks, and I do that myself. I’d rather we had a reviewer who just reviewed the hooks on offer. Moonraker (talk) 06:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i am not sure if this means that you would prefer to have one editor review all the hooks, rather than just a subset. i obviously cannot review alt1 and alt1b, having proposed them myself, so if you would rather i not provide a full review for you, just let me know. dying (talk) 10:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moonraker: I'll be honest. When you say you'd rather have a reviewer who just reviewed the hooks on offer -- don't you think you sound a little entitled? Being reviewed is a privilege, not a right. We don't have to cater to your preference. BorgQueen (talk) 17:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, BorgQueen. I would agree with you that the final choice of hook is not up to the nominator. I do not think it is "entitled" for a nominator to want his or her hook to be reviewed. I must have checked out four or five hundred hooks myself, and I have never offered to review one I liked, but not the nominator's hook, which I didn't like. On whether being reviewed is a privilege, the system of QPQs means it is not a one-way street. The regulars here surely act in good faith, on the principle of "do as you would be done by". Moonraker (talk) 01:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Moonraker: I see your points. Sorry if I sounded slightly blunt earlier. But I must say that I had felt disappointed by the way you rejected the offer from theleekycauldron, and seemingly, the one from Dying as well, which appeared to me unnecessarily selective. BorgQueen (talk) 01:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
BorgQueen, naming no names, I did not find all the comments on this page helpful and decided the best thing was to say no more. I agreed with Dying that he should not review his own hooks. Any selectiveness really only came down to thinking my hook was a good one and it was fair enough to want it kept on the table. Moonraker (talk) 01:44, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Moonraker, i was admittedly surprised that you did not mention being okay with me providing a full review, since i obviously cannot approve my own hooks, so can only approve either alt0 or alt2. (i am also surprised by your use of pronouns, but that is less relevant.) i was expecting to approve both alt0 and alt2 (without the image) barring any other major issues, so was also expecting to strike alt1 and alt1b. (i would have also noted theleekycauldron's concerns to the promoter, so that the promoter could bring the issue to wt:dyk if it seemed warranted.) i had interpreted theleekycauldron's offer as a way to allow all the hooks on offer to be reviewed, as she had made the offer after i had made the offer to fully review your nomination, so i was confused as to why you had mentioned a preference for one reviewer to review all the hooks on offer. of course, now that i have explicitly stated to you that i had expected to approve your hooks, i no longer think it is appropriate for me to actually review them, so i will recuse myself from doing so.
to any future reviewer, i will not be offended if you prefer to not review alt1 or alt1b; as i mentioned above, i would prefer to defer to the nominator's hooks, and had only proposed alt1 and alt1b in case the nominator's hooks were rejected. dying (talk) 04:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dying, thank you for your thoughts. I am quite bemused by the twists and turns of this page. I said nothing to disagree with you doing a review. As you know, I don't agree with your objections to the image. You decided it must be derived from a photograph and therefore was a copyright violation of that, but that was all in your imagination. Meanwhile, Legoktm decided it was a BLP violation because it didn't look like Thunberg, and you then agreed with Legoktm. I do not see how you can have it both ways. That is perhaps beside the point, as the hostile removal of the image from the article takes it out of the picture. I doubt if I shall put myself to so much trouble again. Moonraker (talk) 06:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "I'd rather we had a reviewer who just reviewed the hooks on offer" suggested that you disagreed with me doing a review.
  • i am not sure if you are aware that your language appears to be biased. neither Legoktm nor i "decided" that the image was a violation. characterizing Legoktm's action as a "hostile removal" seems unfair to Legoktm.
  • "that was all in your imagination" seems like an unkind remark to suggest that i am delusional. i don't mind, but considering that i provided prima facie evidence above for everyone else to examine, i imagine that your statement may not have had the effect you intended.
  • copyright violations and blp violations are not mutually exclusive. placing a copyrighted film frame of daniel radcliffe as harry potter in the infobox of the article on elijah wood would presumably also violate both.
  • yes, i noticed that you stated "This is a drawing and the copyright is mine" rather than "I drew this". my comments were carefully worded to leave you an out, but you never took it.
  • another editor removed your image of göring from the article on her, but you reverted the removal. to me, this is beginning to feel like a wp:1am situation.
  • if you did not find all the comments helpful, it may be useful to review them, keeping in mind that most, if not all, of them had been intended to be helpful. i had commented to try to hint to you that you should withdraw the image before others did it for you, but i see that i have failed. i only suggested alt1 because it looked like alt0 was headed for a quick fail, and wanted to save your submission.
  • i have struck alt1 and alt1b to make any potential reviewer's job easier. you are welcome to reinstate them if alt2 is not approved.
dying (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At this point, myself and another user have both objected to ALTs 0 and 2 on the grounds that they take a tabloid-style approach to the personal life of a BLP. DYK reviews usually operate on a consensus of two, but with prior objections, a review wouldn't be enough to stamp either hook. If you'd like to go to WT:DYK, try to get a different consensus, that's up to you. If you're not okay with ALTs 1 and 1b, then this nomination currently has no hooks that can be stamped by review. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:33, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
theleekycauldron, thanks for pointing out that a review would not have been sufficient to greenlight a hook in this case; i had not previously realized that. dying (talk) 14:59, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Moonraker: If you are unable to agree on alternative hook proposals, or are unable to propose a hook that would meet consensus, the nomination will be marked for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:13, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Narutolovehinata5, I am only the nominator here, there has been no review, we are waiting for someone to review any of the hooks on offer. As it happens, I have made no objection to the hook suggested by dying, as improved, though I would not choose it myself. My objection was simply that I did not want it made the only option. Two questions for you, please. (1) Will you explain why I am obliged to "agree on alternative hook proposals", simply because theleekycauldron has personal objections to a hook which has not been reviewed? (2) When you say "the nomination will be marked for closure as unsuccessful", do you mean you will do that, and if so can you please give a link to the DYK rule that says that will happen and who can do it? Moonraker (talk) 11:51, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My point is simply if no suitable hook is agreed on, then yes the nomination can be closed as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:59, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moonraker: All righty, let's see if we can't get this show on the road. What needs to happen for this nomination is at least one of two things:
  • You can lift your request not to have dying's ALTs reviewed on their lonesone.
  • You can dispute one or more of the objections made on this nomination at WT:DYK, and attempt to secure a consensus to approve one of your hooks on offer.
Right now, no single reviewer can approve any of the hooks in this nomination, because there are one or more objections to each hook that would require a broader consensus to overturn. So, letting this nomination wait in DYKN isn't the best idea. Moonraker, what's your next move? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 09:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

theleekycauldron, since dying struck out both his alts, my ALT2 is the only hook on offer, and there is nothing to stop anyone at all from reviewing that. I see dying said that was "to make any potential reviewer's job easier. you are welcome to reinstate them if alt2 is not approved." There is also nothing to stop you or anyone else from suggesting any other hook you like. You have made a personal objection to my hook which you have not related to any DYK rule, and you are not willing to review that; I can only guess why that might be. As it happens, I see nothing "tabloid-style" about it, and it clearly isn't a BLP violation. If it were, you would have removed the facts from the article at once, and you haven't done that. We are simply waiting for a reviewer who will either agree with dying and me that ALT2 is within the rules or else find the DYK rule against it that we haven't seen yet. Then we can take it from there. Moonraker (talk) 11:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Moonraker: Symbol question.svg ah, okay, I can review. In the article, the information is sourced from a book that was published by a less-than-reputable source – I don't really want to edit this article, but I can't exactly figure out why a publisher with less than 200 works and a first-time author make a reputable fact-checked work that constitutes due weight on a BLP's personal life. If we get past that, I'll leave a note at WT:DYK asking about whether DYK wants to run the hook, because sometimes that's an inherently subjective decision the community has to make, and doesn't need to be based on any other rule in the book. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:48, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That makes a start, Theleekycauldron. I am sure there is nothing in policy that objects to first-time authors, even if that is correct. Is there any reliable source for the claim that Archipel is a less-than-reputable publisher? Moonraker (talk) 07:28, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Moonraker: By default, works aren't reliable sources – it'd be on you to show that the publisher has a reputation for publishing reliable biographical content that other works rely on, or otherwise expressing that the book has academic heft. Is this book widely cited in established RSes? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:32, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    theleekycauldron, these seem to be tests you have thought up for yourself, as I do not find them at Wikipedia:Reliable sources, which suggests a number of factors to be considered, and then editors are to judge whether they can rely on a source. You claim you have decided that this particular book, published by Archipel, is not acceptable because Archipel is "less-than-reputable". If you have evidence to support that, then no problem, your judgement will have some substance and I can go along with it, but do you? The burden is on you to make your case, not on me to prove you wrong. If you have no such evidence, then you are showing clear bias, if not dishonesty, and what you have said is defamatory of Archipel. In that case, you should apologize and withdraw from the page. Moonraker (talk) 13:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Moonraker: By "less-than-reputable", I mean that to include "doesn't have an established reputation". Showing a source as reliable under WP:RS, which says that Articles should be based on... published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, requires proponents to demonstrate that the source does in fact have that reputation. The absence of one simply does not count – otherwise, everyone would be a subject matter expert. The reason I bring up being cited by others is that WP:USEBYOTHERS would be a likely path to reliability for a source that has somehow had a breakout reputation despite the low counts I noted before, if you can demonstrate it. Another path would be WP:RSCONTEXT's statement: In general, the more people engaged in checking facts, analyzing legal issues, and scrutinizing the writing, the more reliable the publication. Can you demonstrate some kind of fact-checking or editorial control? Maybe this is the author's first venture into the book world, and has previously published in academic journals, making them a subject-matter expert? I'm not asserting that this source is unreliable or disreputable, I just can't find any evidence to support that it is reliable or reputable. Could you help me out? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 15[edit]

Sujudi

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Jeromi Mikhael (talk). Self-nominated at 06:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new enough and long enough. No copyvio or close paraphrasing found in spotchecks (most are non-English anyway). QPQ is done. However, the hook as it stands will not work, it attributes a direct quote that is both a different wording to the one in the source, and which the source does not note as a direct quote. CMD (talk) 10:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Chipmunkdavis: how about: theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 00:45, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ALT0a: ... that Indonesian health minister Sujudi objected to the government's campaign to promote condom use?
    • "rejected" a "proposed plan" might work. CMD (talk) 01:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Jeromi Mikhael? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I think ALT0a is ok. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 17:28, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • CMD, are there any more issues? Is this ready? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • Alt0a is as written incorrect. A reformulation may work but I don't think I should do that myself as the reviewer. CMD (talk) 05:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
              • @Chipmunkdavis: I'm not sure what you mean; nothing I can see in the Guardian piece explicitly says that Sujudi used his government authority to kill the plan. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:15, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
                • The way I interpret the Guardian article aligns with the article text, "There were suggestions to initiate a government campaign of condom usage", rather than there being a plan. I did a bit of digging, the information seems quite vague, but this source says that while there was a official position on condoms as early as 1996 among the health department it was not something that was really implemented. CMD (talk) 11:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 17[edit]

Asman Boedisantoso Ranakusuma

(
)

Created by Jeromi Mikhael (talk). Self-nominated at 17:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

ALT2 ... that when he was rector of the University of Indonesia, Asman Boedisantoso Ranakusuma would commute via public transportation to the campus to listen to criticisms about the school?
I changed "train" to "public transportation" as the article doesn't specifically mention trains. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Review coming. Symbol question.svg New enough, long enough, neutral and appears well cited (mostly in Indonesian). Copyedited as I read, but a few minor remaining questions for @Jeromi Mikhael: Is it appropriate to link "undergraduate medical degree" to Medical degree? Should "academician" (3x) be changed to "administrator"? What happened after the suspension saga - it seems unresolved? Added back the mention of train, so my preference for hook (also restoring "sometimes") would be:
Very close to approval. AGF on the since-deleted QPQ. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 19:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 20[edit]

Star Control

(
)
  • ... that Paul Reiche and Fred Ford created the 1990 space game Star Control by adapting the action-strategy gameplay from Reiche's 1983 game Archon into a science fiction setting? Source: "I wanna mention that, and it was obvious to us, because we intended it that way, but "Starchon" is really "Archon" with an S-T in front of it. "Archon" being a strategy game on top of a one-on-one combat game and that's what "Star Control I" was."[2]

"The first Star Control is actually somewhat similar in concept to one of Reiche III and Ford’s earlier games, Archon, in that it’s a strategy game where conflict is resolved via action-based one-on-one combat. (It could even be termed a spiritual successor, given that it’s even in the title – “StAR CONtrol”.)"[3]

Improved to Good Article status by Shooterwalker (talk). Self-nominated at 23:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Excellent work improving the article to GA status. QPQ done. The only thing that needs to be adjusted is the ALT, which is not immediately enticing to somebody unfamiliar with the subject or its creators. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I'm open minded. I've done a few of these and I was starting to feel a little repetitive with "did you know that this was considered one of the best games because...?" I figured I would try to link it to another historic game, but I can see how that might be inaccessible to someone who isn't into games. Let me know what you think, and I'll come up with something either way. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very sorry for leaving you hanging, my friend. Let me jump back into this DYK tomorrow. Been slammed with work, but things are lightening up again. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 00:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Shooterwalker: The article itself is tip-top. I just think the hook is a little staid and wouldn't be rewarding for readers unfamiliar with the subject. I would offer my own ALTs, but don't want to disqualify myself as reviewer by doing so. That said, there is a lot of material in this article that could be mined for appealing ALTs. For example, this passage alone seems like it could generate two very effective ALTs: "When they saw that the Syreen ship resembled a cross between a rocket ship and a ribbed condom, Fred Ford suggested calling it the Syreen Penetrator, which coincidentally happened moments before the 1989 San Francisco Earthquake." —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry for being MIA again. Was out of town, then got caught up in other articles I've been working on. Your revised ALT is better, but it still needs a bit of work. I would trim down the overlinking of well-known things and maybe remove the reference to the Loma Prieta quake. Ideally the ALT would focus either on the unusual appearance of the starship or the timing of its naming, but not both as it might be a bit much. Feel free to ping me. I'll be able to respond in a timelier fashion now that I have more time. :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 23:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT2 ... that the creators of the 1990 space game Star Control designed a starship for an all-female alien race, naming it the Penetrator for its resemblance to a ribbed condom?
ALT3 ... that the creators of the 1990 space game Star Control named a starship the Penetrator for its resemblance to a ribbed condom, moments before the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake?
@CurryTime7-24: Having trouble deciding so I gave each one a try. Let me know what you think. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol confirmed.svg @Shooterwalker: Both ALTs are wonderful! Thank you for your patience with me and for your excellent work. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:22, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg This needs more work, as I've checked the sources cited in the article, and they do not exactly verify the specific claims made in ALT2 and ALT3 (and in the sentences where they are cited in the article). Pinging CurryTime7-24. Cielquiparle (talk) 10:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 23[edit]

Lewis Manly

(
)
Manly in college
Manly in college
  • ... that despite having never played the sport before, Lewis Manly (pictured) tried out for his college's football team, made the squad, and went on to become one of the best linemen of his time? Source: [4] ("Manly found his way to Wooster as an undergraduate in 1921 and decided to go out for the football team as a freshman, despite never playing the sport previously. Four years later, he was considered one of the star linemen of his time.") (in case you're wondering its reliability, it appears to be (besides the images) a copy of [5] from Wooster College, which is certainly reliable)

Moved to mainspace by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lewis Manly, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @BeanieFan11: Good article but I concerns about the reliability of Woosterhalloffame. If a reason as to why it's reliable can be provided then I could approve. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol confirmed.svg Assuming that the sources are good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:06, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Sorry, I'm pulling this from prep. The article (including the hook) is based largely on an unattributed page hosted at https://shootermcgavin.com, a booster site with no visible editorial oversight, and indeed nothing to indicate who writes anything on it, and (contrary to what's said above) no evidence of being "published by the College of Wooster". (Shooter McGavin was the villain in the Adam Sandler film Happy Gilmore.) The page opens with
    Lewis F. Manly is part of the lore at two of today's most prestigious small colleges in the United States‚ The College of Wooster, recognized year-in and year-out as one of the top-75 liberal arts institutions in the country, and Tufts University, widely considered one of the nation's leading research universities.
There's no way such a page is a reliable source for anything, and certainly not for unattributed opinions such as he was considered one of the star linemen of his time and nine total varsity letters, the all-time record at the school -- which isn't even what the (unreliable) source says, which is he had nine varsity letters, which was a Wooster all-time high at the time, according to some historians (underlining added).
And to really rub it in, what first attracted me to this was the hook, which suffers from two WP:ELEVARs ("football" -- "the sport"; "team" -- "the squad"), a "went on to", plus the dreaded despite [6].
... that despite having never played the sport before, Lewis Manly (pictured) tried out for his college's football team, made the squad, and went on to become one of the best linemen of his time?
EEng 15:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@EEng: As I said, it (besides the images) is a copy of [7], published by Wooster College (see the first sentence: Lewis F. Manly is part of the lore at two of today's most prestigious small colleges in the United States ‚ The College of Wooster, recognized year-in and year-out as one of the top-75 liberal arts institutions in the country, and Tufts University, widely considered one of the nation's leading research universities. What would you suggest the hook be? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well we don't know who's copying who, but either way that just makes things worse. If it's the website of the college calling itself one of today's most prestigious small colleges in the United States, then the whole thing is just plain boosterism. Forget the hook until the article itself is sourced to reliable sources only. I'm not even sure he'd pass GNG -- for example, IIRC Marquis' Who's Who is a vanity publisher and not evidence of notability (though this might not have been true 50 years ago -- we'd have to check at WP:RSN). EEng 17:39, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He's most certainly notable (I didn't even add the Who's Who ref) – Manly served 16 years as a CFB head coach, received a NYT obit, and has been covered significantly numerous times. I still don't see why Wooster College would be an unreliable source. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:44, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How many years he served is irrelevant -- only coverage matters. You do have the Who's Who in the article, and the NYT obit is a single sentence [8]. "He's been covered significantly numerous times" -- list them (and please, no more one-sentence obits). I explain above why an unsigned page of boosterism isn't reliable. He may very well be notable but at this point it's far from "certainly". EEng 18:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BeanieFan11: Here are a few sources for you, I can probably search out a few more as well.
Canton Daily News "The only three letter man in the class... played guard in football and was Wooster's outstanding lineman."
Evening Independent Newspaper "Professor Lewis Frederick Manly coach at Tufts College awarded the Varsity T for his work in life and for his record of achievement."
East Liverpool Review Newspaper 9 varsity letters Bruxton (talk) 16:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also regarding Wooster, U.S. News & World Report list of National Liberal Arts Colleges Rankings - College of Wooster Wooster, OH #76 National Liberal Arts Colleges.
"From the experts at The Princeton Review" The Best 373 Colleges
Forbes #66 In Liberal Arts Universities Bruxton (talk) 18:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@EEng, BeanieFan11, and Onegreatjoke: What is happening with this nomination? Bruxton (talk) 19:56, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In my opinion this should be good to go, as the sources you've shown (thanks) clearly prove that the school has been highly ranked and so an article written by it mentioning that should not be deemed unreliable under the offense of it being "plain boosterism" (whatever that means...) BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The article relies heavily on an unsigned article of unknown provenance, hosted on a website named after a Happy Gilmore character, and which was either copied from what might be an official Wooster site, or the reverse, but we can't tell which; try asking at WT:DYK if you like. And I asked you to list the sources qualifying him for notability, but haven't got an answer on that. EEng 01:11, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd argue this should be promoted – the article on ShooterMcGavin.com is published by the "W" Association of Wooster College, which selects its hall of fame and other things, [9]; it should be reliable, I've never seen an issue with college's hall of fame websites as sources. And Bruxton has proved false EEng's claim that it is "plain boosterism," and those were the two arguments against posting. This should be ready to go in my opinion. BeanieFan11 (talk) 12:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging two experienced football DYK users for their thoughts: @Cbl62 and PCN02WPS:. BeanieFan11 (talk) 12:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 25[edit]

Barış Youth Symphony Orchestra

(
)
  • ... that the Barış Youth Symphony Orchestra was founded at İzmir in 2015 after an example in Venezuela to educate music for children with limited opportunities and to keep them away from crime? Source: "İzmir'de dar gelirli ailelerin çocuklarının suçtan uzak kalmasını sağlamak amacıyla 2015'te ilk adımları atılan Barış Çocuk Senfoni Orkestrası ..." , "Venezuela'nın başkenti Karacas'ın dezavantajlı bölgelerinde yürütülen "El Sistema" projesini örnek aldıklarını ..." (in Turkish) [10]

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 11:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Barış Youth Symphony Orchestra, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol delete vote.svg I have concerns. First off, usual disclaimer that Wikipedia's coverage of "local" topics can be woefully lacking, especially local topics in areas without much English-language media. So your work expanding that area is genuinely appreciated. That said...
  • I don't know Turkish. However, some of this article doesn't seem to be accurate or proportionate interpretations of the sources. For example, Kadifekale is linked, and nom added a section to that article on the youth orchestra. But the Wikipedia article and the newspaper source are obviously not talking about the same thing - the Wikipedia article is talking about a historic ruined castle, while the newspaper article seems to refer to it as a troubled neighborhood. I recognize that the neighborhood is probably named after the castle (or they're both named after the same thing), but the point remains, it's off-topic. The same is true of Agora of Smyrna, where the linked article is a heritage site and not a neighborhood. But more generally, even if there was a neighborhood to link, it's literally one word in the sourced newspaper article, with no context or explanations. I don't think it's due weight to copy it over here. More generally, I'm inclined to think that this article is much too long. It's including trivial details like specific grants from the webpage of a non-profit (Sivil Toplum Destek Vakfi), which just isn't Wikipedia-relevant: we should be using secondary sources. Most of the newspaper articles are short and inconsequential. The longest newspaper article is still a bit of a "culture beat" filler-type article about some local organization, and while I'm not one of them, certainly some Wikipedians would probably call this a WP:NOTNEWS violation for expanding a common newspaper story into a Wikipedia article. I'm not saying the article should go to AFD, but I do think if cleaned up, the article would be 4 sentences long, and essentially say that the Barış Youth Symphony Orchestra is a local orchestra in Izmir, skipping out on all the news/PR type material. Such a cleaned-up article would then fail DYK length requirements. I'm inclined to think that the article needs some more substantive sources than what it has currently to qualify on grounds of verifiability and length. (But happy to help if such sources are found!) SnowFire (talk) 05:43, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • theleekycauldron The point is that for the founding of the orchestra in Turkey, the example in Venezuela has been taken, where children are kept away from crime through music. The military music is irrelevant. I don't know how do you come on this argument. CeeGee 05:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  • Shorter hooks are more memorable. The part about keeping kids away from crime is the feel-good "meal" for people who click the article to read it. The DYK hook is just the interesting part, it's a teaser, and the closest to a teaser is an interesting juxtaposition between Venezuela & Turkey. The less distracting parts, the better.
  • If someone else wants to review the DYK, they're free too - I made some minor edits for clarity and concision. I would probably cut it down even further if I full followed my preferences per above, but tried to keep it to non-controversial stuff. SnowFire (talk) 05:16, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • SnowFire I appreciate very much your edits in the article. However, I don't agree with the Alt-hook at all. If you wish to transfer the DYK-nom to someone else, you can use the "DYK?again" tick. CeeGee 05:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As it stands, SnowFire, this nomination is marked for closure. Are the issues irreparably prohibitive for DYK purposes? Iff so, CeeGee, do you agree? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:10, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg In my opinion this is still too minor for DYK but then I believe that DYK should have somewhat stricter standards than others. That said, I'll let someone else take a fresh look if desired.
On the hook comment, I still believe my ALT1 is better than the original hook if there's a desire to run this after all. I get it that it doesn't include the "keep kids away from crime" part but DYK hooks have to be interesting and "punchy". The content of the article will fill readers in on the crime-prevention aspect. Concise hooks are also much better than long ones, so restricting to the one, most interesting thing helps. SnowFire (talk) 22:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 27[edit]

Untitled Goose Game

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by MyCatIsAChonk (talk). Self-nominated at 23:56, 27 January 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Untitled Goose Game, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - not for the first hook.
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @MyCatIsAChonk: Good article. But I'm not seeing the first hook be supported by the source. Onegreatjoke (talk) 01:37, 4 February 2023 (UTC) @Onegreatjoke: The lead section is not cited, but the fact is mentioned down in under "Development and release": The game originated from a stock photograph of a goose that an employee posted in the company's internal communications, which sparked a conversation about geese. The citation is for a Tweet from the lead game dev at House House (the company that made Untitled Goose Game).Reply[reply]

@Onegreatjoke: Are there any other changes you'd like me to make? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 13:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since the previous reviewer hasn't responded for a few days, I'm going to give it the holy tick. Symbol confirmed.svg I prefer the ALT2. BorgQueen (talk) 07:18, 8 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BorgQueen: Now that I think about it, this has some seriously good potential for an April Fools hook. If it's not too late in the game, here are some proposals:
ALT3: ... that geese make good protagonists?
Source and context: The protagonist of the game is a goose; the idea came from a stock photo of a goose posted in the game dev's Slack chat. Source is a Tweet by a dev at the company: https://twitter.com/mjmcmaster/status/763596145452912640.
ALT4: ... that Debussy is still hip?
Source and context: The music in the game is derived from a Debussy prelude. Verge article: https://www.theverge.com/2019/9/23/20879792/untitled-goose-game-nintendo-switch-debussy
ALT5: ... that geese can be hitmen too?
Source and context: One of the games that was used as inspiration was the Hitman franchise for its targeted-mission style (as shown in the original ALTs). Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49852317
An image of a goose would make sense for 3 nd 5 (here's some possibilities: one and two). If it's not too late, I think this would be really great. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 02:57, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Amusing, sure, if you're willing to wait until April. BorgQueen (talk) 04:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @BorgQueen: Would you mind moving it to the April Fools page? Is there a specific way I should do it? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 14:57, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Cielquiparle and Theleekycauldron: What do you guys think? BorgQueen (talk) 15:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @BorgQueen: we have lots of leeway on April Fools' Day for hooks, but stating jokes or quotes in wikivoice isn't usually something we screw around with. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 07:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • @Theleekycauldron: Respectfully, I don't feel that any of the April Fools' ALTs are twisting quotes; the only one that could possibly be close to that is ALT5, but that's a generalized statement in the article, not a quote. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 01:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • The issue isn't that we're twisting the quote, MyCatIsAChonk, it's that we're repeating a quote without saying it's a quote. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC) hey, my apologies for being curt. I was frustrated about something in the meatspace, and it's totally not fair that I radiated that out here. if we could find another quirky part of such a funky game, that'd be great :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:06, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • @Theleekycauldron: It's all good; I've struck through the ALT0 through ALT2 because they're not April Fools' hooks, and ALT5 because of the quote issue. ALT3 and ALT4 are spinning the nature of the game. Personally, I prefer ALT4, but I do realize that it's less about the game and more about the music of it. Thoughts? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 14:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

MyCatIsAChonk, thanks for striking ALT3. Could you explain how ALT4 doesn't express an opinion? (By default, a statement is made in wikivoice unless we attribute it to someone else). theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:43, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theleekycauldron: Comparing it to the criteria under WP:VOICE, ALT4 is not an opinion (while I don't consider it a fact, I believe it's a rephrasing of a fact, the fact being that Debussy's music is still used today), it's not seriously contested, it's not a definite fact, not judgmental, and doesn't give undue weight to something. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 21:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg This DYK nomination needs a hook that can get approved. Not too late for April Fool's Day consideration but it has to pass. Cielquiparle (talk) 13:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: Is there anything else you think should be changed? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 29[edit]

Claude Vivier

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Charlieridgley (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 22:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Claude Vivier, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Looks good! Can't read French but the source seems fine. Elli (talk | contribs) 14:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol question.svg @Onegreatjoke and Elli: I'm not sure which part of the online copy of the source corresponds to pages 28–29, but the only relevant text I could find was l’un des premiers compositeurs ouvertement et fièrement homosexuels du Québec – "one of the first openly gay composers in Québec". Sojourner in the earth (talk) 12:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging GA editor @Charlieridgley: to make sure they are aware about the issue with the hook and claim that "one of the first in history" may be too broad. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:58, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is an excellent article, and I hate seeing it held up over this issue. Charlieridgley, who got the article up to GA, has been inactive for a couple of months. In their absence, I've been a bit bold and removed the "one of the first openly gay composers" line from the article. I think there are many alt hooks that could do this article justice. How about:
  • ALT1: ... that Claude Vivier was inspired to compose Shiraz after hearing two blind singers in a market?
Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 04:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging Elli any thoughts on this edit and alt? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:17, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lovely's Purchase

(
)
  • ... that President James Monroe had promised an exclusive "... gateway to the setting sun ... where they were not surrounded by the White man" to the eastern Cherokee that resulted in the creation of Lovely's Purchase? Source: Gabler, Ina (1960). "Lovely's Purchase and Lovely County". The Arkansas Historical Quarterly. 19 (1): 31–39. doi:10.2307/40038035. ISSN 0004-1823. JSTOR 40038035.

Created by GenQuest (talk). Self-nominated at 15:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lovely's Purchase, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @GenQuest: Good article, but I can't seem to find the first hook anywhere in the article.

Onegreatjoke: See first sentence in the "Background" sub-section. GenQuest "scribble" 02:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC) Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:33, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol confirmed.svg I see Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I added and additional ALT that I think reads better than the first. GenQuest "scribble" 18:03, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@GenQuest: I wanted to promote this but was wondering why the last sentence of the "Major Lovely" paragraph didn't have a citation...thought it was probably an easy fix...then found that I can't seem to find a source referring to Lovely's multi-step purchase starting in 1813? I don't doubt that it exists somewhere, but I'm not seeing it in the Agnew article, in the Encyclopedia of Arkansas, or Muskogee Phoenix. Cielquiparle (talk) 03:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle: I fixed the confusion and mixed-up dates. Thanks for pointing it out. GenQuest "scribble" 21:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
GenQuest I haven't had a chance to re-review the article line by line, as that would take some time, but I haven't blocked it from being promoted either, so if it looks ok to another editor, it could still get promoted by someone else in the meantime. (Regardless, it generally takes a long time for hooks to get promoted, unless the hook is so amazing that everyone is clamoring to promote it first.) Cielquiparle (talk) 16:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg My general feeling is that this article is in better shape than the other one (on Buchanan's Station), following the fixes mentioned above which hopefully resolved the failed verification and missing citation issues. I would also appreciate another reviewer to look at this closely, and provide a green tick mark if it looks ok. Thanks in advance. Cielquiparle (talk) 20:35, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 30[edit]

Airis Computer

(
)
  • ... that Airis Computer Corporation designed their 1991 laptop with the ability to have its BIOS updated via a modem connection? Source: "For Chicago-based Airis, the bright idea is TeleROM, says Steve Valentor, engineering vice president. All Airis computers have built-in modems, and by combining that capability with a bank of flash memory that stores system BIOS, Airis can offer users a highly desired feature: instantly updatable BIOS. Simply by dialing into Airis's bulletin board, users will be able to update their BIOS for a nominal charge" (Shandle 1990).

Created by DigitalIceAge (talk). Self-nominated at 20:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Airis Computer, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg @DigitalIceAge: Firstly, it's been a week since the nomination, so a QPQ must be provided as soon as possible for the nomination to pass. Secondly, the hook seems to require specialist knowledge: it requires readers to know that modem connections and computer updates via such technologies was still new in 1991. Maybe something less specialist can be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:29, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Narutolovehinata5: Apologies for the absence of QPQ, got majorly sidetracked on here. Perhaps:
    • DigitalIceAge (talk) 01:50, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I suppose ALT1 works (ALT2 is also a decent hook but I think ALT1 is more unusual). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I do have a minor concern with the article: maybe the sentence The product was met with a number of delays, and Airis fizzled before the company could sell many (or any) units of the laptop. can be rewritten? I'm not sure if "fizzled" is an encyclopedic term, and so is the use of "(or any)". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:54, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. However, now that I think about it, I wounder if that part should be rewritten entirely; rereading the article, the claim that none were sold was never confirmed, but a claim by two separate publications. Maybe the lede should be modified to reflect that it was a claim? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not sure if MOS:CLAIM applies or not, but I have reworded the last couple of sentences in the lede to reflect the uncertainty. Thanks for the suggestion @Narutolovehinata5:. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. That part just needs a few minor grammar-related copyedits and this will be ready for a full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed; if grammar-related copyedits are still needed, they can be noted as part of the full review. Ping to nominator DigitalIceAge. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It Was Hot, We Stayed in the Water

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by PerfectSoundWhatever (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 22:45, 4 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/It Was Hot, We Stayed in the Water, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg @Onegreatjoke: Article promoted to GA on Jan 30 and nominated on Feb 4. It is long enough and everything is backed by sources. Hook meets the length requirement, it is interesting and cited in the article. QPQ done. Copyvio is a bit too high at 48.7%, I'd recommend trimming down Elverum's quotes from the KEXP source. Sebbirrrr (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Not done. What's the point of chasing an arbitrary number when it doesn't reflect the true state of the article? Most of the "flagged" passages on Earwig are just the album title. There are a handful of quotes I used, (which are properly shown as quotes and clearly not copyvio) but I don't think anything I did is violating a Wikipedia policy; point me to one if I'm wrong. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 04:29, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @PerfectSoundWhatever: Apologies for not pinging you as well! This isn't a policy violation as you indicated that the quotes are directly coming from Elverum. I did notice that the album title appears four times, however I still think that some of the quotes could be paraphrased as copyvio flags the source as being in the yellow area. Sebbirrrr (talk) 13:38, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Blue Marine Foundation

(
)

5x expanded by Arcahaeoindris (talk). Nominated by Paul2520 (talk) at 19:04, 31 January 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Blue Marine Foundation, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - n
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Arcahaeoindris and Paul2520: So i have some concerns. Firstly, the hook isn't really that interesting. I would like for you to propose another one. Second, how many of these sources are reliable. I'm not really familiar with these sources so apologies if i'm too harsh but what makes super yacht times (The link says page not found) and slow life symposium (i can't reach the site) reliable? Also, like half the sources have links yet these links either take me to 404 error pages or the home screen of the news source and not the actual citation. I would like some explanations for this. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I also took a look at the article with the intent of possibly suggesting a new hook, but I noticed that the article appeared to have some minor possibly NPOV-violating wording, almost making it read like some kind of advertisement. Phrasing like "On a smaller scale, BLUE was instrumental in July 2012 in the creation of a unique alliance between fishermen and conservationists" and perhaps the whole section may need to be checked for tone. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello. I'd like to make clear that this article was split off from a longstanding section of George Duffield (film-maker). I did not write much of the text here or find the sources, and made this clear in the edit history. I'll nevertheless try and fix the 404 links using the dead link fixing tool. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 19:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 31[edit]

Powell Marsh Wildlife Area

(
)
Trumpeter swans landing on the Vista Flowage
Trumpeter swans landing on the Vista Flowage

Created by Heeps of Wiki (talk). Self-nominated at 15:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Powell Marsh Wildlife Area, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Full review to follow, but I'm not really a fan of either hook. The second just isn't intriguing in a "hooky" way, while the first hook seems a bit technical; in particular, it mentions "flocs", which is a term readers may not know. Perhaps different hooks can be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:08, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I agree that the second hook is not the best, perhaps the third one is a bit better? I think it's a bit less technical and gets the point across in a hookier way. Thank you for your time. Heeps of Wiki (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ALT2 is okay, but it doesn't seem to be explicitly mentioned in the article? The water becoming polluted that is. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Heeps of Wiki: status report? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Apologies for the late response, I didn't get a ping for this page for some reason. In the referenced article, there is this quote: Lake proponents say the water pressure in the manufactured wetland forces groundwater, rich in iron, into Dead Pike Lake. Rip out the infrastructure, return the marsh to its natural form, and Dead Pike Lake will be saved, they say. “This lake represents an opportunity for people to get a sense of what a pristine northern Wisconsin lake still can look like. But they’re polluting it,” said Wolf. “Our own Department of Natural Resources has contributed significantly to environmental damage and to the loss of property rights for the citizenry that’s here.” Heeps of Wiki (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, but the article doesn't seem to have been edited in a while and my original concern remains unaddressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The article hasn't been updated in a while because I am not sure what to fix. I misconstrued your earlier comment which asked where the statement was in the article, I assumed you meant in the reference. But either way, in the Powell Marsh Wildlife Area article, there is prose in the Dead Pike Lake section that I feel adequately mentions the polluting of the water, and the source of said pollution. If this does not assuage your concerns, let me know how I can best rectify the problem. I would also love to hear some other feedback for the article. Heeps of Wiki (talk) 13:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

North Carolina Council of State

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Indy beetle (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/North Carolina Council of State, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Began reviewing for DYK

good article on January 31, 2023, 8179 characters (1289 words) "readable prose size", 29 references cited inline, Earwig stated that copyvios were unlikely; primarily multi-word phrases which aren't a problem. Hook is NOT interesting, which is a primary requirement for DYK. Added alt1 hook; asked nominator to approve or supply their own.

QPQ was Bernard Rwehururu.


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - n
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol redirect vote 4.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgreason (talk • contribs) 16:41, 2023 February 14 (UTC) Mgrē@sŏn (Talk) 21:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol question.svg Adding query tag as ALT1 needs to be independently approved. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 07:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Actually, this needs a new reviewer to approve ALT1. I have adjusted the DYK checklist to reflect the fact that the original hook was not considered to be interesting, and changed the status therein accordingly. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think "holdover" is really a great way to describe the Council of State as it relates to history. Sure, the body originated in colonial governance (as did the office of governor and the office of secretary of state) but to call it a mere holdover I think dismisses it in a way I don't think accurately reflects what the sources say about this body. -Indy beetle (talk) 09:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ATL2 ... that Elaine Marshall is the first woman elected to the North Carolina Council of State in its 246-year existence? source — Maile (talk) 20:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Crew Motorfest

(
)
  • ... that The Crew Motorfest takes place in Oʻahu, the same place as the first two Test Drive Unlimited games which were previously worked on by the some of the same developers? Source: [13] and [14]
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: If someone has any idea to word the hook better then feel free to tell me. Also, I'm including DecafPotato as an additional author since they helped me write a decent amount of this article.

Created by Blaze Wolf (talk) and DecafPotato (talk). Nominated by Blaze Wolf (talk) at 15:25, 3 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Crew Motorfest, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Newly created article about a video game. The article is long enough and sourced throughout. ALT0 is a bit confusing but makes sense when reading the article. It would have to be reworded to indicate what Ivory Tower is. I guess, instead of which were previously worked on by the director of Ivory Tower?, say which were previously worked on by the some of the same developers? QPQ is not needed as Blaze Wolf and DecafPotato have three DYK credits combined between them. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Muboshgu: I like that. Sounds much better to me. Feel free to use that. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 02:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg We aren't allowed to request DYK dates based on commercial releases, but in the case of this "upcoming" video game, it would be helpful to know when the game will finally be published, because at the moment this article is mainly written in future tense and relies too heavily on the vendor as a source, making it arguably too WP:PROMOTIONAL. Once the game is released, there will be reviews and more independent secondary sources we will be able to cite in the article. In any case I'm uncomfortable with this article going to the main page as is, but perhaps this can all be rectified in the near future. Cc: @Blaze Wolf, DecafPotato, and Muboshgu: Do we know? Cielquiparle (talk) 05:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 3[edit]

No More the Fool

(
)

Created by Moscow Connection (talk). Self-nominated at 23:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/No More the Fool; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Not really a big fan of the hook since it is reliant on names that not be familiar to all readers (for what it's worth, I do know who Wilde is thanks to Kids in America, but I can't assure that most readers are familiar with her). Can a different angle be proposed here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:10, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I will expand the article tomorrow or the day after tomorrow and will try to find another interesting fact about the song to use for the DYK. The problem is that I could find only one book that I could use. And there isn't much in it that I haven't already put into the article. --Moscow Connection (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moscow Connection: Okay. Just note here on the nomination page once those have been accomplished. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:53, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Moscow Connection: Any updates on this? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:32, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Tomorrow, I promise. Sorry for the delay. --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:16, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Narutolovehinata5: Could you maybe propose something else as a hook?
      I think that he current hook is interesting. And I can't think of anything better.
      Btw, I've been trying to find more sources to use, but I can't find anything. And I couldn't find a single source that would say what the song was about. I even tried searching for a source saying this song was a ballad (it is ballad, isn't it?), and nothing.
      I can ask for help at the music project talk page, maybe they will be able to find something. And to come up with a better hook.--Moscow Connection (talk) 08:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm going to be frank here: with the current content, I don't think the article is a right fit for DYK. There's not much in the article that seems to be intriguing to a non-specialist audience, especially if readers don't know who either name is (I personally only recognize Wilde). Looking at the article again, I think the only possible option that could still be used might revolve around this particular part: "I’ve been writing this song for Kim Wilde," said Ballard and showed them "No More the Fool". Brook's husband and Mike Heap were instantly "blown away". "That’s it!," said Jordan when Ballard stopped singing. "But I’ve written this for Kim Wilde," said Ballard protestingly. "No you haven’t. You’ve written it for Elkie Brooks," replied Jordan. Basically, a rewording of the original hook, but with more emphasis on the quote and Ballard's protest. But otherwise, I'm also out of ideas. In any case, the article does meet the technical DYK requirements including a lack of paraphrasing, and a QPQ has been done. I'll assume good faith on the sourcing as I can't access the sources. The article is technically eligible for DYK, but its lack of a suitable hook (proposed or possible) is the sticking point here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Yes, some pages are omitted from the Google Books preview. But you can try googling „"Finding My Voice: My Autobiography" site:idoc.pub“. And maybe, just maybe, you'll find something. :-) --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:05, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll just ask for help at the music project. The song is very famous and it's a pity I wasn't able to find more information about it. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:05, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have asked for help here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Any help appreciated at Template:Did you know nominations/No More the Fool. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:50, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's getting warmer, but I think the "protested" wording like in the quote would make it more intriguing regardless of reader familiarity with the names involved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:46, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mosaic of Rehob

(
)
  • ... that people returning from the Babylonian captivity to the Holy Land and to their places of settlement in the Holy Land at that time left an indelible mark on how the Jewish nation is to perform certain religious practices? Source: Mishnah (Tractate Shebiith 6:1 )
    • Reviewed:

Created by Davidbena (talk). Self-nominated at 18:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mosaic of Rehob, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - n
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Davidbena: Welcome to DYK! Now, when I say the hook isn't interesting, i mean that the hook is confusing. I'm not understanding what the hook is supposed to say and I think that's because the hook doesn't have any links to other wikipedia articles in it. Also Mosaic of Rehob Isn't linked in the hook either so i'm not sure what the mosaic is. Also, i'm not sure what citation that's supposed to be as i'm not used to the citation style of the article. Also, I'm stumped specfically on "left an indelible mark on how the Jewish nation is to perform certain religious practices?" because i don't know what you mean by "indelible mark", what "Jewish nation", and what "certain religious practices". Also the hook is too long, it's at 220 characters when it should be less than 200. I know I said a lot but hopefully it doesn't scare you. I saw this "The mosaic contains the longest written text yet discovered in any mosaic in the region, and also the oldest known Talmudic text" in the lead that could work as two possible hooks if this doesn't work. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So, should I go ahead and re-submit a nomination for this page "Mosaic of Rehob" at DYK, using your suggested hook? I'm willing to do so. I'll also link the name "Mosaic of Rehob". If you give me the go-ahead, I will re-submit it, with the hook reading this time as follows:

"Did you know that the Mosaic of Rehob contains the longest written text yet discovered in any mosaic in the region, and also the oldest known Talmudic text?" Davidbena (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Davidbena: I might have confused you but that's not what I'm asking. I'm mainly asking you to make your hooks more specific and do add some links to other wikipedia pages not to do a whole other nomination. Like for example, something like this.
  • "... that the Mosaic of Rehob contains the longest written text yet discovered in any mosaic in the region, and also the oldest known Talmudic text?"
Though if we are going to work with this hook, there are two minor problems I kind of have with it. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:39, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, that's also fine. Can I empower you to help me with this? Your suggestions are good, and since I have never done this before, you seem to be better fit to fix all the small problems.Davidbena (talk) 22:52, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Davidbena: Here's my two problems.
  • It says "in any mosaic in the region" but what region? I can't tell if you mean the palestine region, the holy land, or some other region I don't know about.
  • The hook needs to be stated in the article, not just the lead, with an inline citation. I might be dumb but I can't see these mentioned in the article at all other than the lead.
These are generally pretty easy to fix and answer so I hope to see them done. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The obvious answer to that is "... that the Mosaic of Rehob contains the longest written text yet discovered in any Hebrew mosaic in Palestine." I will make the correction now in the main article, and I'll find a way to incorporate the text, besides in the lead, also somewhere else.Davidbena (talk) 23:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Onegreatjoke:, At your directives, I have just now amended the text to read "...in Palestine," instead of "in the region," and I have also repeated the claim that it is the largest Hebrew mosaic found in Israel, with a source, in the section entitled "Description of mosaic".Davidbena (talk) 23:39, 6 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Alright that's pretty much it. Now, since the hook we worked on was technically my hook, I'm going have to give this review to someone else since i'm not allowed to review my own hook. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:37, 7 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That should be fine. Good luck!Davidbena (talk) 03:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Onegreatjoke:, Wikipedia allows only seven days to submit a nomination for DYK after an article has reached "Good Article" status. Should I re-submit the nomination before this time-frame has expired?Davidbena (talk) 23:47, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You've already submitted the nomination you don't need to submit it again. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol question.svg The article looks good, long enough and well cited. The hook is interesting enough, but I feel like it being the oldest known Talmudic text is more hook-y. "The oldest X" is just slightly more interesting than "the longest text on a type of art from a specific place", and the Talmud is reasonably well known. BuySomeApples (talk) 06:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Davidbena and Onegreatjoke: BuySomeApples (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 4[edit]

Sara Gadalla Gubara

(
)

Created by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 02:00, 4 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sarah Gadallah Gubara, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - not needed
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg As clever as this hook is, I'm afraid that the source of the hook https://www.assayha.net/ is reliable or not. I'm not sure if https://www.unicef.org/ can be used as a source at the DYK. Please explain the source's reliability. Taung Tan (talk) 18:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Taung Tan newspaper shout is a respected Sudanese newspaper although it is diffcult to prove this. There are some news excerpts from around that time but it is in arabic so I am not sure who much I am stretching your kidness, and a picture for the winners (she is next to the guy in the front with glasses . There are other sources including France24 eluded to that + The UNICEF also talk about the race + Sudan Jorunal but not in details, there is a detailed account at Alarabya, a online blog written by a Sudanese historian, Sara's TEDxTalk and nationl TV interview which includes some images. I hope on of these stick.

article:     Her documentary film The Lover of Light (2004) is both a metaphor for Gadalla Gubara and for his interest in bringing social issues to light through filmmaking.
source:     Sara's film The Lover of Light (2004) is both a metaphor of Gadalla Gubara and of his interest in bringing social issues to light through filmmaking.
also, although there aren't many english sources, i picked one of them at random, and it doesn't seem to support the text for which it is cited. the source is used following a paragraph covering gadalla gubara's tertiary education, but the source doesn't seem to mention her tertiary education at all. i admittedly stopped checking sources after that. dying (talk) 20:30, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dying:, the sentence was taken from Cinema of Sudan (before ref 23). I have now rephrased it. Reference 19, was also copied over from the lede of Gadalla Gubara, ref. 2 (also indicated in the edit). I should have checked, and sorry for not doing that. I have now moved to where it belongs, near ref (26). It is now being replaced by Ref. 10, 6, and 19 — Preceding unsigned comment added by FuzzyMagma (talk • contribs)
FuzzyMagma, that is good to know. thank you for clearing that up. (by the way, the title of the documentary should have remained in italics when you were rephrasing the sentence mentioned above, as placing the title in italics is not a personal decision, but a general english standard. more details regarding how wikipedia treats titles of works can be found at mos:title. Done FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
unfortunately, i am now also worried about the quality of the sources provided. i decided to take a look at the arabic sources, and the first one i looked at, the sudaneseonline source, appears to be a message board, which is not a reliable source. depends on who wrote it? not all sources are BBC and NYT. I mentioned above who wrote it and why I think it can be seen as reliable. anyway can be removed if contested further FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
admittedly, i stopped looking at arabic sources after that. i also noticed that the article was originally translated from ar wikipedia. as i am not fluent in arabic, i cannot competently check for copyright violations or instances of close paraphrasing with regard to the arabic sources, which may have existed in the ar wikipedia article before you translated it. I am not sure casting doubts without an evidence is a good thing as it can be easily interrupted as assuming bad faith. Please either give evidence to your claims or refrain from being too hypothetical FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
due to these issues, i do not feel comfortable promoting this hook at this time. your opinion is noted, and again can be easily amended - at least the point were you provided a ground for doubts. anyhow there is already an endorsement and a DYK check above FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
anyone else is free to promote this hook if they are confident enough in the quality of the hook and the article, you did not mention anything about the hook itself in your argument, so I am not sure why now you are mentioning the quality of the hook FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
or request a more in-depth review if they believe it is warranted. i do want to see this article promoted, as i had initially looked over this nomination intending to promote it, but i don't think i am competent enough to give this nomination a proper review. dying (talk) 11:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dying: in-line response FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:07, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Needs further review by new reviewer per discussion aboe. Cielquiparle (talk) 12:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TVBoy

(
)
TVBoy mural of footballer Alexia Putellas
TVBoy mural of footballer Alexia Putellas
  • ... that street artist TVBoy, known for his murals of footballers in Barcelona (example pictured), was asked to paint uplifting art in regions of Kyiv ahead of the one-year anniversary of the 2022 Russian invasion?
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Norma Shearer filmography
    • Comment: Various sources in article, most in Catalan. I welcome other hook suggestions! The only image currently on Commons of either topic mentioned in the hook is the Putellas one - it does show a little bit of a Ukraine one next to it; that might be appropriate so I've included it in the nom. It might also be a nice image to feature on MP during March, as Women's History Month.

Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 14:16, 7 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/TVBoy; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hi Kingsif (talk), review follows: article created 4 February and exceeds minimum length; article is well written; I tagged one exhibition for citation; I didn't spot any overly close paraphrasing of the sources, though many are in languages I cannot read (and haven't checked); cold you confirm which part of the cited article supports the "uplifting" (as per hook) or "art to bring positivity" (as per article), it wasn't obvious to me from the Google translation, the rest of the hook checks out. Image is good and looks to be OK in Spain as per Commons:Freedom of panorama (though I am not an expert). A QPQ has been carried out - Dumelow (talk) 15:11, 7 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Dumelow: I'm still busy, remind me to get to this if I leave it too long, hopefully I won't. Kingsif (talk) 13:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Kingsif, just a gentle reminder as it's been a week. No rush if you're still busy though, happy to wait a bit - Dumelow (talk) 07:09, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the reminder, I should be either less busy or more busy soon, I can probably go through this tonight. Kingsif (talk) 21:48, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jeff Wrana

(
)

Created by HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:23, 4 February 2023 (UTC). Note: As of October 2022, all changes made to promoted hooks will be logged by a bot. The log for this nomination can be found at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jeff Wrana, so please watch a successfully closed nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - I think ALT1 might be partially incorrect; I'll explain why further down below.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Really interesting submission! Almost everything looks alright, from the article's length and age, to the sources you used, to the QPQ requirement. ALT1 definitely looks like the "hookiest" hook, if it makes sense, but I fear there's a problem with it: the second half contains an an unclear statement... See, saying "breast-cancer free" might lead some people (including myself) to think that Wrana and Taylor's tool could help predict if a woman can completely avoid contracting the disease. Unfortunately, that's not exactly what's reported in the source you linked, which states: "Canadian researchers have developed a technology that analyzes breast cancer tumours in a new way, allowing them to predict with more than 80 per cent accuracy a patient's chance of recovering. The goal of the computerized tool is to eventually help doctors better target treatment to an individual patient, based on their tumour's profile." So, I think that technique is mainly about cancer treatment and survival, rather than cancer immunity... If confirmed, both the hook and the quote from the article should get edited accordingly: however, let me know if I missed something important! Oltrepier (talk) 21:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: More specifically, I would suggest these kinds of hook:
ALT1b: ... that in 2009, Jeff Wrana helped develop a tool that could help physicians predict whether a woman is more likely to survive breast cancer?
ALT1c: ... that in 2009, Jeff Wrana helped develop a tool that could help physicians predict whether a woman is more likely to recover from breast cancer?
By the way, cancer biology is one of the subjects I'm currently studying at uni, so I'm not just doing a review, but you're also allowing me to have a review... : D Oltrepier (talk) 21:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@HickoryOughtShirt?4: how's this going? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Oltrepier and Theleekycauldron:. I am so sorry, I am just seeing this review for the first time. My fault for not checking it. I am completely fine with any of Oltrepier's proposed hooks. Let me tweak the sentence in the article. Also, Oltrepier, that is so cool that you're studying cancer biology. I am in absolutely no way studying anything STEM related in uni right now so I was relying heavily on my own translations/understandings. Thank you for clarifying my error. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 18:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@HickoryOughtShirt?4: No worries at all! And that's fine: I'm not mother-tongue in English, either, so I definitely understand there can be some issues with the translation and the interpretation of documents... But anyway, this is not a big deal. : ) Oltrepier (talk) 21:15, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Oltrepier and Theleekycauldron: is this g2g? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Yes, absolutely! I just can't promote my own hooks by myself... : D Oltrepier (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to check ALT1b and ALT1c to see whether they can be approved. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @HickoryOughtShirt?4 and Oltrepier: Symbol question.svg It looks like ALT1b and ALT1c make claims that require secondary sourcing in line with WP:MEDRS – I don't think that The Toronto Star is gonna cover it, but we're looking :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:05, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Oltrepier: As a reminder, ALT0 doesn't carry any MEDRS implications, if you'd like to approve it :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:37, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Symbol question.svg I do think that ALT0 still is a biomedical statement. More generally, popular media or PR pieces from the researcher's institution (such as this one aren't really that reliable for priority-type statements about being the first to discover something. I'd like to see a citation from a medical source; it doesn't have to be peer reviewed but should be from a technical medicine-oriented publication or organization, more like this one. Or you can stick to a general statement about what kind of research he does. Also, male breast cancer is a thing, so the hooks should be rewritten to be gender-neutral. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 03:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • i'd personally say it's bio, not biomed, but i think you're right otherwise – i'd also want to see some kind of medrs-reliable secondary source that confirms. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 03:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 5[edit]

Farzi

(
)

5x expanded by Krimuk2.0 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Farzi; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Symbol question.svg Length, history and reference accepted. Good to go ... but for copyvio detector finding great similarity with this page. It looks to me like our article came first, but I'd like to clear that up. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:29, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Symbol question.svg Hook is good with reference and all, but the issue remains with copyvio with the article and the gamingwap.com website. After that is resolved, I feel with that this article is good to go for DYK. Toadboy123 (talk) 21:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry but gamingwap.com are the ones who blatantly plagiarised what I wrote first on Wiki. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 06:19, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging Daniel Case and Toadboy123, in case they hadn't seen the above response. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Considering the above response and the fact that the website plagiarized from Wikipedia article, I would say the article would be good to go for DYK. Toadboy123 (talk) 21:58, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 7[edit]

2023 South Ethiopia Region referendum

(
)

Created by Chipmunkdavis (talk). Self-nominated at 07:55, 8 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2023 South Ethiopia Region referendum; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Is it really a good idea to run a hook for this article before we have the election results, especially as it will likely be running a few days after we get the results (and therefore rather significantly changed from the nominated version)? Not totally opposed to this; I don't think it is explicitly banned to do something like this, but I'm not sure it's really a good idea either. There aren't any other problems here, though. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An interesting question. We don't run political hooks before elections or similar, but the actual voting has passed. (Another issue perhaps is that if I had waited for the results it would be past the seven day mark, but that's DYK so here we are.) Hopefully timely results emerge on the predicted date and the article will be updated then. CMD (talk) 06:00, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think the point that Elli raises – and I must say, I agree – is not one about promotionality, it's one about article integrity. Once the results are released and analyzed, the article is likely to need or poorly undergo a large spate of of editing, and it'll need a re-review then. Let's hold off on approval until the results are tallied. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 09:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article has been updated by HapHaxion. CMD (talk) 13:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pinging Elli and theleekycauldron to see whether their concerns have been addressed by the updates. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gonna defer to Elli on that one, I think :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 22:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 9[edit]

Mark Hunter (photographer)

(
)
Mark Hunter In 2007
Mark Hunter In 2007
  • ... that Mark Hunter, known as The Cobrasnake, started “one of the earliest and most impactful social photography sites” according to Vogue? Source: “ Hunter’s blog, which was one of the earliest and most impactful social photography sites of its kind, offered anyone with an internet connection unprecedented access into the blossoming hipster subculture: an intoxicating–and intoxicate” Vogue

Created by Thriley (talk). Self-nominated at 04:45, 17 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mark Hunter (photographer); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Would it be possible for someone crop the image I included in the nomination? I think it’s great, but wouldn’t stand out on the front page as it is. Thriley (talk) 04:52, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol question.svg New (moved from draftspace Feb 9) and long enough. Mostly well written and sourced; some notes are below. Unable to load Earwig, but don't expect any issues there. QPQ present.
    Here are a few suggestions: The lede could use another sentence explaining what Hunter is known for, and move the birth date to just after "Mark Hunter". Add birth date and age to infobox. Fill in some bare link citations. Uncurl quotation marks. The sentence "It allowed anyone on the internet to have access" is hyperbolic; maybe put this in Vogue's voice (as in "Vogue argues that it allowed anyone on the internet to view ..." or similar). Some lingering q's: What did Hunter change the name of his website to? Relevance of the Kennedy paragraph? Why put one sentence about Hunter's book under its own heading?
    Not sure about the photo ... I see that it was uploaded by a new account (presumably Hunter), but it cannot be "Own work" because Hunter is the subject of the photo and not the photographer.
    The current hook doesn't grab me. My current thought is something zany like
but would love to hear any other suggestions. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 19:27, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Thriley: Hi, just checking in two weeks later. I realize I wrote a fairly long list of things to do. The only important ones for DYK are about neutrality and completeness - revising "It allowed anyone on the internet to have access ..." and clarifying a few things that are labeled "lingering q's" above. I can do any remaining copyediting after that. And please suggest a new hook, since I'm not supposed to approve one of my own. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 14:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I’m going to shortly fix up the article and come up with a new hook. Thriley (talk) 20:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on February 12[edit]

Women and bicycling in Islam

(
)
Fatma Aliye Topuz
Fatma Aliye Topuz

5x expanded by LegalSmeagolian (talk) and Bookku (talk). Nominated by Bookku (talk) at 17:32, 12 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bicycling in Islam; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • The first DYK source is accessed by request from WP:REREQ quote is included in the article citation that shall help verification, rest of the 2 DYKs were accessed from Google books. Bookku (talk) 12:19, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @LegalSmeagolian and Bookku: Could you please explain how you arrived at 5x expansion? I am not able to replicate your calculations using the DYK tool, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong. (If the article is eligible, I would like to have the article run on International Women's Day if possible...but I do have a few very specific comments about things to fix first.) Cielquiparle (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Cielquiparle: Sorry I am not technical enough for exact counting. But we rescued article from AFD claims, renamed and almost WP:TNT new start over. In number of sentences terms we may have retained at the most five sentences from version prior to 7 Feb, We added almost 30 new sentences. If you do not count bibliography part then new sentences are 5 times. Bibliography too was added by me in December.
Since it is almost afresh I thought to present it over to this forum. we wish to respect rules and guidance. Bookku (talk) 18:36, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough (expansion began on February 7 and was submitted on February 12). Although the way in which the 5x expansion was calculated did not, strictly speaking, adhere to the rules, based on the explanation given above, I see that the "original" article had 620 characters (105 words) of "salvageable prose" and by February 12, it had expanded to 4,795 characters (777 words). (The article is now at 5,786 characters (948 words) of prose.) On this basis, we can say that the article is long enough (expanded more than 5 times), and I would just ask that next time, you read the rules and install the DYK check tool so there is no uncertainty or confusion. (Basically, it's cleaner to delete all the prose you are not planning to keep, the day before you start expanding.) The article is well sourced throughout, with inline citations, and a lot of care has gone into trying to maintain a detached and neutral tone about a very sensitive and controversial subject. Earwig says copyvio is unlikely, although I do have one immediate concern which I will explain below. The QPQ is done. ALT0 is OK. So what is left is to discuss the other hooks and address some related issues:
1) Please minimize the text quoted in Footnote 2 (the Raab chapter). It is too long and will raise flags down the line. I understand maybe you just included it to help the DYK reviewer, but we don't need it anymore, so please only include 2 to 3 key sentences at most.
2) ALT1 is not approved, as I was unable to verify this fact based on the source. While it's fine to just discard the hook if you don't want to fix it, the corresponding claim in the article still needs to be fixed. The original text (which is easily accessed through Wikipedia Library) says Follow the Women bike tour (followthewomen.com), from Beirut, Lebanon, to the Palestinian city of Bethlehem. The cyclists, whose ranks included women in long sleeves and head scarves, and women who'd learned to ride just to join the trip, rode with queen Rania Al-Abdullah of Jordan as well as Syrian first lady Asma Akhras Al-Assad, crossed the Jordan River (which was neither deep nor wide, they reported), shared meals with locals and visited refugee camps... Many of the Arab women ended their ride early... The reason I object to the current wording of ALT1 is that it makes it sound like both Queen Rania and First Lady Asma al-Assad rode together all the way from Beirut to Bethlehem, when in fact, based on other sources it sounds like they probably only joined a portion of the ride, because as ride sponsors, they were also responsible for hosting and officially receiving the cyclists. I would advise either finding a reliable source that explains their role a bit more clearly and modifying the article accordingly, or simplifying the sentence in the article so that it sticks closer to what the "Pedaling for Peace" article actually says (that the Rania and Asma "rode with" the women, without implying they both rode with the women the whole way).
3) In ALT2, the word "powerful" sounds non-neutral in wikivoice, so it needs to be reworded somehow – e.g. simply striking the word "powerful" out, or using wording to make it clear that there is a specific scholar you are naming in the article who says it's a "powerful metaphor" (e.g. "is viewed as a powerful metaphor...").
If you could please address these issues ASAP, I am happy to approve the hook for DYK. Many thanks for your hard work in rethinking and reworking this insightful article following the AfD discussion. Cielquiparle (talk) 19:43, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pinging @Bookku:. (Also edited my own copy above.) Cielquiparle (talk) 19:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle Many thanks for valuable inputs. We shall ping you as we accomplish suggested improvements. Although Alt1 and Alt2 are not must- in the article and in DYKs too I have tried to present diversity across regions in Muslim women's cycling practices and there by avoiding stereotype.
1) I have trimmed ref note a bit, I am also contemplating to split in feminist view and orthodox view and look for further scope of trimming as required.
2) For Alt1 I shall request @LegalSmeagolian and Ipigott: to help out to avoid grammar mistakes from my side when article is soon about to go for DYK. I suppose for Alt1 more sources may be available in Jordan and Syrian Arabic news media, but availability of such sources shall take it's own time.
3) About Alt2 metaphor of cycle in photographs has been discussed by author Raab too but without using word metaphor. Besides both the movies have been explored favorably by multiple academic authors though I could not spare enough time on all of those. I am removing word 'powerful' from 'powerful metaphor' as of now as suggested. Idk if word 'substantial' will be enough for toning down.
Just now saving in bit of hurry. I shall work further a little while later.
Bookku (talk) 05:08, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bookku: Thanks for your response. Cielquiparle (talk) 13:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Approving ALT0, ALT1, and ALT2. The current wordings of both ALT1 and ALT2 have been amended slightly to address concerns raised earlier (ALT1 says "took part in" instead of "took"; the word "powerful" has been removed from ALT2). The direct quote in the footnote has been split and shortened (though it could be shortened more, it is better than before). Additional sources and content have been added re: the Follow the Women bike tour. Happy to have this promoted for International Women's Day (8 March 2023, Prep Area 1) if possible. Cielquiparle (talk) 13:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@RoySmith, the link created by you seem to go some where else. I suppose that needs to be WT:DYK#Bicycling in Islam Bookku (talk) 06:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, my bad. The WT link is the correct one, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is just for record. I had discussed my views on some of the concerns expressed @ User talk:RoySmith#To clear the air. To be editorially neutral I will take their relevant concerns on article talk page for discussion after present round of article update by other users. Bookku (talk) 07:57, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Murders of Annette Cooper and Todd Schultz

(
)

Created by Valereee (talk). Self-nominated at 00:25, 12 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Murders of Annette Cooper and Todd Schultz; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Comment: I know it's not usual to include the name of a person without an article, but this person has been fighting to get his name cleared for 40 years and I feel like it might be worth an exception. Valereee (talk) 00:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - The word fiance should be fiancé
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg I'm happy with the name: I think there's a good reason to include it, since he's a key figure in the article and it adds significantly to the interest of the hook.

I worry that the phrasing is a little clunky: how about:

ALT0a ... that Dale Johnston was declared innocent of murdering and dismembering his stepdaughter and her fiancé in 1982, 30 years after being sentenced to death for it? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I would avoid gerunds, as you could substitute the it in the final clause with the boldfaced phrase and get a very misleading interpretation (i.e.: was declared innocent of murdering and dismembering his stepdaughter and her fiancé in 1982, 30 years after being sentenced to death for murdering and dismembering his stepdaughter and her fiancé in 1982).
I suggest:
ALT0b ... that Dale Johnston was declared innocent of the murder and dismemberment of his stepdaughter and her fiancé in 1982, 30 years after being sentenced to death for it?

Farides Vaca

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Krisgabwoosh (talk). Self-nominated at 10:13, 14 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Farides Vaca; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - n
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Krisgabwoosh: Good article but I don't that think that the hook is that interesting. There have probably been plenty of politicians and maybe some Bolivian ones that had no political experience prior. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol voting keep.svg I'd say that the new hook is better. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:54, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg @Onegreatjoke and Krisgabwoosh: We need to be able to find the hook in our article with a citation. #3b. i suggest for DYK purposes that the hook is inserted in the article with a citation directly following. Bruxton (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: It is cited? It mentions she was a librarian, that her party hedged its bets on political renovation, and that it was in one of the closest districts. In fact all three claims are cited to the same source (Romero Ballivián 2018, pp. 609–610). Is it because portions of the hook are split between different parts of the article? Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Krisgabwoosh: Scattered and hard to find. Perhaps for the purpose of DYK it can be said in a sentence and cited. This will make it easier for everyone along the way. Bruxton (talk) 23:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: Pretty much everything included in the hook is included in the same paragraph in the article. The only thing omitted is the fact she's a librarian, which I honestly don't see a way of shoe-horning in. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 23:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 14[edit]

Rufina Bazlova

(
)

Created by Zartesbitter (talk). Nominated by Paul2520 (talk) at 02:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Rufina Bazlova; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - Inline citations needed
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Zartesbitter and Paul2520: So some problems. Firstly, The awards and exhibitions sections look to be mostly uncited and I would prefer citations for them. Second, the hooks mentioned need to have inline citations in the article which it doesn't look like it is. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:23, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have fixed the problems now. Zartesbitter (talk) 12:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Onegreatjoke: did Zartesbitter's work adequately resolve the issues you mentioned? = paul2520 💬 15:41, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Henri Hekking

(
)
A contemporary depiction of sick and dead men in a Japanese camp
A contemporary depiction of sick and dead men in a Japanese camp

Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 09:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Henri Hekking; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Green tickY - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Green tickY
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg This is my first DYK review, so I hope I'll handle it correctly. Both the article's length and age are OK, as well as the QPQ requirement; I assume good faith for the off-line sources you used, especially since you've indicated the exact pages and ISBN addresses. However, there were some odd phrasing choices and references throughout the article, which I should have already fixed by myself (at least partially). Also, make sure the article's text does not resemble the original quotes too much. Both hooks seem interesting: however, if we decide to go for the first one, it probably needs to be shortened and made clearer; most specifically, I would exclude the quote "that he first learnt from his grandmother", since I haven't seen it mentioned directly in the article itself (yet). On a side note, the image looks fine, but could use a more specific description. Oltrepier (talk) 11:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Oltrepier, thanks for your review. Happy to look at any "odd phrasing choices and references" if you can point them out to me? Also, anything that "resemble[s] the original quotes too much", not aware of anything overly close to the sources but happy to take another look. Happy to exclude the bit about the grandmother if you like. I've reverted some of your changes to the article there is no need for a 4 paragraph lead for a shortish article and no need to duplicate citations from the main text, removal of "perhaps" from "perhaps the most successful..." changes its meaning etc. see my edit summaries for details - Dumelow (talk) 12:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dumelow: Oh dear, did I make the article worse? I'm so sorry... Going back to the first question, I actually changed most of those phrases in my first edit on the page: for example, I edited the phrase "His camp had the lowest death rates of any [...] in a nearby camp of 470 men" because I thought that sequence of consecutive numbers would create a bit of confusion (I'm not mother tongue in English, though, so that might be the real reason). Still, none of those instances were a big deal, to be fair. On the other hand, thank you for double-checking on close paraphrasing: I've already updated my lead template to reflect it. Right, I'll write down my proposal for the hook in a separate message. Oltrepier (talk) 13:42, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let's try this for the first hook, then:
ALT2 .. that Dutch medical officer Henri Hekking is credited with saving hundreds of lives in Japanese prisoner of war camps (example pictured), including by using herbal medicine?
By the way, was Hekking a medical officer and a physician? Oltrepier (talk) 13:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Hi Oltrepier; sorry, reading back my comments they are really grumpy! Apologies and I hope I haven't dissuaded you from reviewing here. Your edits to the article have improved it on the whole and you've picked up on some important things that I missed. Good point on the physician bit, I think I was using it instead of "medical doctor" (in British English we would usually just say "doctor" but it is complicated by those with doctorates in other fields). I guess physician might imply he was treating civilians regularly (in British English we'd say "general practitioner")? I will switch it to just say "medical officer". Happy with your proposed hook but we will need another reviewer to approve it (reviewers cannot approve their own hooks). Sorry again for my abrasiveness, you've done really well with your first review, keep up the good work - Dumelow (talk) 14:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dumelow No worries at all, I actually appreciated the feedback! I just felt a bit dumb after finding out that you already had plenty of experience with similar subjects... : ) Thank you for your support, as well. So, now I have to wait for another editor to reply before giving the (final) green light, right? Oltrepier (talk) 15:08, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No that's fine, your job is effectively done as you've approved everything else in the checklist above. The second reviewer can give the green tick themselves after reviewing the hook - Dumelow (talk) 15:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dumelow and Oltrepier: Hmm, couple notes (I was invited here via my talk). First, I think drawing a but-for causation from untested herbal medicine to saving lives would require a WP:MEDRS level source; at minimum, probably something better than an oral history would be good. Second, I don't think the image really demonstrates relevancy to Hekking, so I would advise reconsidering whether it belongs in Hekking's article (rather than a broader-concept article about the state of the place in general). theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 06:26, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi theleekycauldron, thanks for the input. I came at this article from the military history side and have no medical expertise. I don't think I would be able to track down the appropriate medical sources so happy to look at alternative hooks. How about:
  • ALT3 .. that Dutch medical officer Henri Hekking is credited with saving hundreds of lives in Japanese prisoner of war camps in the Second World War?
Source as above
  • ALT4 .. that two American officers use their watches to bribe Japanese troops to have the Dutch medical officer Henri Hekking allocated to their prisoner of war camp?
Source: "But then we were lucky; we had Dr. [Henri] Hekking as our camp doctor. ... Captain Fitzsimmons contributed his wristwatch, and Lieutenant Lattimore a pocket watch, and they used the watches as a bribe to the Japanese to get us Dr. Hekking" from: Yung, Judy; Chang, Gordon; Lai, Him Mark (20 March 2006). Chinese American Voices: From the Gold Rush to the Present. University of California Press. p. 217. ISBN 978-0-520-24310-1.
Happy for the hook to run without the image but think they provide a bit of context for the article of the sort of conditions Hekking was working in - Dumelow (talk) 09:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dumelow and Theleekycauldron: ALT3 looks like the best option to me, to be fair. And yes, I must admit I forgot about WP:MEDRS, either... Oltrepier (talk) 14:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Dumelow and Oltrepier: Looking at ALT3, it's sourced (in the article) to Crager 2008 and The Wolverine Guard. Crager doesn't appear to mention the claim, and The Wolverine Guard doesn't repeat the claim in their own voice, but instead sources that crediting to a PoW who later wrote a book. Is there any reason to believe H. Robert Charles counts for more than an anecdotal source? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 10:04, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi theleekycauldron, I've clarified the attribution in the article to a former prisoner, I had thought "credited" was enough to imply it was an opinion but happy to strike ALT3 to avoid controversy. What's your thoughts on ALT4? - Dumelow (talk) 10:56, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 16[edit]

An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital

(
)
  • ... that in Marxist scholar Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital, he insists that all three volumes of Das Kapital need to be read to understand Marx? Source: "Heinrich insists throughout the text that a reading of Capital that does not include volumes 2 and 3 will lead necessarily to misinterpretation: 'What we believe to be understood after reading only the first volume is not only incomplete, but in fact distorted' (9)." https://doi.org/10.1080/08854300.2013.795263
    • ALT1: ... that when Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital was published, Paul Cockshott claimed Heinrich removed the scientific method from Marx? "In a nutshell, my objection to Heinrich's interpretation is that, if we follow it, we end up with something that is no longer a scientific theory of capitalism, whereas a slightly different interpretation gives a strong and testable scientific theory." https://doi.org/10.1080/03017605.2013.805004 (posting the doi for proof of peer review-- non-paywalled link available here: https://marxismocritico.com/2016/05/24/new-age-marxism/)
    • ALT2:... that in Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital, he argues that Marx rejected economics? Within world view Marxism, Marx had taken over key categories, if not the whole, of the labour theory of value from classical political economists like Adam Smith and David Ricardo, and added to that an explanation of exploitation and the crisis-prone nature of capitalism. Thus, according to this view, 'there are no fundamental categorical differences between Marxist political economy and classical political economy, only differences concerning the conclusions of both theories' (p 33). According to the 'new reading of Marx' that Heinrich subscribes to, this is a faulty understanding of what Marx was attempting to do in Capital. This is highlighted by the subtitle of the book: 'A Critique of Political Economy.' Marx was not trying to provide an alternative political economy, but wanted to 'criticize the categorical presuppositions' of political economy. This is the key difference and can be emphasised by noting that Marx was not 'predominantly criticizing the conclusions of political economy, but rather the manner in which it poses questions' (p 34)" pages 26-7 of https://www.jstor.org/stable/24482457
    • ALT3:... that in Marxist scholar Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital, he claims to solve the transformation problem? "Heinrich's claim is ultimately that Marx's labour theory of value is a monetary theory of value: 'without the value form, commodities cannot be related to one another as values, and only with the money form does an adequate form of value exist' (63–4). It is a compelling reading, and one with which Heinrich can also sidestep the infamous 'Transformation Problem' that plagued Capital's reception since its first printing. He essentially calls the entire problem a category error: he insists there is no point trying to derive production prices from values, because value and price are 'different levels of description' (149), mediated by different forms of exchange."
    • ALT4:... that according to Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital, Marx opposed the labor theory of value? Source is same quote as ALT2 and supplemented directly from Heinrich: "Marx's value theory is a monetary theory of value...However, within traditional Marxism, a non-monetary theory of value was dominant..." (page 165 of the book)
    • ALT5: ... that Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital was widely adopted in German universities? "Backhaus’s ideas of the special logical character of Marx’s analysis have been preserved and further developed in Germany, especially in the work of Michael Heinrich. His interpretation of Capital is quite influential, since the standard work used by the German Capital reading groups is his Kritik der politischen Ökonomie Eine Einführung. The book is now into its tenth printing, and is also used widely in the German universities." from https://brill.com/display/title/21786
    • ALT6: ... that Marxist scholar Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital was praised for discussing all three volumes of Das Kapital? "In addition to depth and clarity, what I find most noteworthy about the book is that it offers a systematic introduction to all the three volumes of Capital. Many commentary pieces—both articles and books—on Marx's critique of political economy refer to Volume I. References to Volumes II and III are, if at all, unsystematic and fragmentary...By engaging with all the three volumes of Capital in a systematic manner, Heinrich presents a comprehensive account of Marx's work on political economy." from https://www.jstor.org/stable/24482457
    • Reviewed:

Created by Freedom4U (talk). Self-nominated at 08:08, 20 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Red XN - I'm not sure the hook is catchy - I don't think its surprising to a general reader that someone would think that you need to read an entire work in order to understand it (even acknowledging that this is not often done for Capital).
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Article is long enough, new enough, neutral, and well sourced - I think you've done a good job with this article. If you could find a more interesting hook (does Heinrich have an unusual take on Marx, or an intriguing comment from one of the book's reviewers?) that'd really help. WJ94 (talk) 12:06, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @WJ94: You just challenged an unchallenged view I've had which was that most people who read Capital Volume 1 don't read Volumes 2 or 3, and maybe it doesn't have as much basis as I thought. I've added an alternative DYK which talks about Cockshott claiming Heinrich's interpretation made Marx unscientific. Also made it so that the citations pointed out exactly what belonged to what. Freedom4U (talk) 12:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Freedom4U: Thanks for that. My point was not so much that most people do read volumes 2 and 3, but more than for a general audience who might be unfamiliar with Marx, it is perhaps not surprising that a commentator on Marx advocates reading all three volumes. I have some reservations with ALT1 - specifically, I'm a little nervous about using a negative comment about the work where the source is the person who made that comment. I think we'd be on safer ground with a hook based on one of Heinrich's claims in the book. There might be something in the critique of worldview Marxism, or the idea of critiquing both Marxism and bourgeois readings of Marx? WJ94 (talk) 12:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @WJ94: Thanks for your critique. Your comment about it being for a "general audience" got me thinking and I've added three more alternatives. Yeah, was iffy about the Cockshott one too-- what he's trying to say is that Heinrich's interpretation of Marx can't be "empirically proven" or something along those lines. Freedom4U (talk) 13:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Freedom4U: Great, thanks for those alternatives. I think ALT3 probably requires too much contextual knowledge for the general reader, but I like the other two. I have slightly modified ALT2 to remove the final clause (which I think reduces the clarity of an otherwise good hook) - I hope you don't mind. But I am happy to Symbol confirmed.svg approve ALT2 and ALT4. WJ94 (talk) 13:26, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg @Freedom4U: Ambitious. Nice work so far, but I'm afraid your hooks don't really link up enough to the article text – you're still assuming too much knowledge on the part of the reader to be able to draw the same conclusions you are drawing in the (approved) hooks. (Quite frankly, to me it feels like there's quite a jump in logic as well – in both hooks.) Could you please take a look again at the article itself – and try to make it a bit more accessible to someone who isn't necessarily that familiar with Marx or with basic concepts in political economy? And then sync up the hooks and/or propose new ones as well? Cc: WJ94 Cielquiparle (talk) 13:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Revisiting this after taking a step back, I can see your point. I've altered the article slightly so that hook 2 is clearly mentioned in the article, and I've struck down hook 4 as I think it may be difficult for it to have integrity with the article without being WP:OR. :3 F4U (they/it) 13:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Freedom4U: Thanks for updating. The connection between the remaining hook and the article is clearer...but now it seems clear that the hook is misleading! Is the author really saying Marx was not an economist? At all? Like the hook seems to say? Cielquiparle (talk) 13:56, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle: I've updated the hook to match— also expanded the article quite a bit. I've also added an uncontroversial but plain hook 5, and hook 6 which is a rewording of the original hook to make it more interesting. :3 F4U (they/it) 00:45, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for taking a second look at this, Cielquiparle. I have updated the section in the article on Marx's relation to economics to more closely match the source. Might I suggest the following hook which I think is interesting and more closely matches the article (and the underlying source):

WJ94 (talk) 11:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @WJ94 and Freedom4U: Thanks both. I'm liking ALT7. How about another word for "providing", like "building" or "constructing" ...? You could also use "argues" rather than "claims". Cielquiparle (talk) 14:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Cielquiparle and WJ94: Hmmm, not a fan of ALT7 as that isn't what the article states/what is stated in the sources. Marx is providing his own theory, but the distinction is that his theory is not a political economy. Suggesting the following alternative:
lmk what you think! :3 F4U (they/it) 14:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Could we resolve that by adding a "just" to the hook? For example:
WJ94 (talk) 14:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @WJ94: I'm really sorry that this is dragging on so long, but that reads awkwardly and isn't completely accurate. What Heinrich is bringing up is that Marx's critique of political economy was the basis of his work. He's not criticizing those before him and separately bringing up a new theory, but rather his critiques of those before him is his theory (or at least plays a fundamental role in it). Consider:
  • ALT10 ... Michael Heinrich's book An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital argues that Marx was interested in critiquing the fundamentals of political economy?
or potentially could use the word 'contested'
lmk how you feel about this! :3 F4U (they/it) 19:51, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How about:
Cielquiparle (talk) 00:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle: Works for me! :3 F4U (they/it) 01:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually, I was thinking about this and I want to suggest that
might be a better hook. It's basically a rephrased version of my original hook, but unlike the original, phrasing it this way makes it interesting to a common audience. I think the idea that a book was praised for discussing something that's in its title raises more questions and interest than ALT10a and its derivatives would. It's also more concise. :3 F4U (they/it) 03:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Freedom4U: I think I see what you mean now (and it is an important point, like in the Adam Smith universe telling people to read the part about "fellow feeling"). ALT6a is better than ALT0, but it still needs more work, because it's too pat – I think a lot of people would read it and shrug, rather than feeling compelled to find out why and click. There may even be room to be extra clever here and write a quirky hook (the closing hook in the DYK set that is often offbeat or humorous). So if you really want to go down this route, it may be worth getting out the crayons to try out some creative alternatives until we hit on the right one. Just to get things rolling, here are some variations (none of which seem particularly funny but are shorter the way hooks generally are)...
Cielquiparle (talk) 06:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(FYI, you used ALT6d twice so I've edited your comment to remove that mistake, I hope that's alright with you) @Cielquiparle: I think ALT6c, coincidentally the shortest, is the most interesting among those hooks with ALT6b being second place. ALT6f-g don't read well and are hard to understand on first read. I feel ALT6d-e make it more difficult to realize what the tension being created is. Here are some variations of ALT6c I've made to keep it going:

:3 F4U (they/it) 07:09, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK so ALT6i and ALT6j don't work because it sounds awkward in wikivoice (i.e., why would Wikipedia express an opinion on what was strange or unexpected)? Also struck ALTh because "abnormal" sounds odd. I am liking the past tense that you introduced in ALT6k and ALT6l (especially given that Heinrich is now widely adopted in Germany and somewhat old hat). So below is an update to ALT6c which you liked in past tense, one with the word "engaging" from Basu, plus a few more using a different approach:
Over to you. (Not sure if you saw the review in Contemporary Sociology via JSTOR, but that review has some interesting quotables as well. But tabling that for now to keep it simple.) Cielquiparle (talk) 08:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(It's already in the article (Sica 2012)-- I would state that German and English-language Marx literature is different, and the book had already become a staple in Germany when it was first translated into English. Basu is speaking of the English context, and shouldn't be considered an authority on Marx literature in other languages) @Cielquiparle: ALT13 and its derivatives don't feel interesting... A hook that amounts to stating that a book exists I feel isn't hook-y. What about quoting Basu, to state:
or could "considered" be removed for:
or potentially:
All of the ALT6s could work better if "discuss"/"engage"/etc were replaced with "introduces"/"introducing" as that makes it more absurd. Off-topic, but just realized and found it funny that the premise of this joke is only possible in English since the German title is Critique of Political Economy: An Introduction :3 F4U (they/it) 09:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Point taken re: ALT13 derivatives, but I would point you to the February 2023 DYK stats page – do a search for "Encyclopedia" or "Encyclopedia (novel)" and see the hook there. Oddly simple and tempting to dismiss, but I would argue that the number of pageviews is much higher than one might expect for what it is. (Anyway one thing that jumped out in the review from Contemporary Sociology was the comment about Heinrich's use of simple arithmetic to make Marx more accessible to novices.)
I am liking ALT15 more and more but I confess I had to read it several times before I got the "joke". Re: ALT14 and derivatives, for all of our splitting hairs over this, in the end, the proofreaders may end up removing the quotation marks around "noteworthy" and in general the pendulum is swinging against putting things in scare quotes without some additional contextualization, unless it's the quirky hook (i.e., not sure if ALT14a would survive, but I am leaving it). Anyway if you click around the DYK stats pages section in general, it may give you more ideas for what people have done with book titles and other rather wordy article titles. Or, if you think we're done and want a reviewer to review the ALT hooks, that's fine too. Just make sure you add the word "noteworthy" to the right place in the actual article ASAP before you forget. Cielquiparle (talk) 09:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Cielquiparle: On second thought, I don't think there's an appropriate way to fit "noteworthy" into the article, so I've struck those out. I've stretched out the hyperlink and I think that puts extra emphasis on the fact that words are being repeated.
  • ALT15a ... that An Introduction to the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital was considered unusual for introducing the Three Volumes of Karl Marx's Capital? "Heinrich insists throughout the text that a reading of Capital that does not include volumes 2 and 3 will lead necessarily to misinterpretation: 'What we believe to be understood after reading only the first volume is not only incomplete, but in fact distorted' (9). This is one way in which the text stands out from the field of recent offerings." in https://doi.org/10.1080/08854300.2013.795263 and "In addition to depth and clarity, what I find most noteworthy about the book under review is that it offers a systematic introduction to all the three volumes of Capital. Many commentary pieces--both articles and books--on Marx's critique of political economy refer to Volume I. References to Volumes II and III are, if at all, unsystematic and fragmentary. As a result, they offer only an incomplete picture of Marx's work." https://www.jstor.org/stable/24482457
Regarding Encyclopedia, I think there were some obvious reasons it did quite well (A novel being an encyclopedia is quite strange, and then you realize that it's a novel that's titled Encyclopedia, but no wait, its a novel that's titled Encyclopedia that is an encyclopedia! All while being hosted on an encyclopedia... Like the article was just interesting on its own so it didn't need much more than a plain hook) :3 F4U (they/it) 10:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OHHHHHHHH I've just figured out what you were trying to do in ALT13, I didn't realize you were trying to do the double meaning of introduce and introduce (publish). Given it took me this long to realize by myself, I still don't think its that engaging. :3 F4U (they/it) 11:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT15a could work. Here's one last try from me, I'm happy to call it quits soon:
("Wait, when was the introduction first published in Germany then?" [CLICK.]) Cielquiparle (talk) 11:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That sounds like another mild hook, I'd be fine with any of the ones that haven't been striked through, though I would prefer 15a for the quirkiness. Pleasure working with you @Cielquiparle: :3 F4U (they/it) 12:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Capex Corporation

(
)

Converted from a redirect by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 16:16, 18 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Capex Corporation; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg @Wasted Time R: @DigitalIceAge: New enough and long enough; QPQ present. Oh cool, a local company, and one I'd never heard of. I can't say I find the hook all that interesting, maybe because of the "was" phrasing (not common in hook); I will provide an ALT0a and ALT1 below. I do need a citation for the parenthetical (Computer Associates subsequently developed an additional product called CA-OPTIMIZER II for the OS/MVS operating system.) Weirdly, that parenthetical is flagging Earwig to some sort of presentation; can it be reworded, is it even germane? I also wonder if our long Business Journal quote "encountered the types of limitations that would encourage him and countless other engineers and technical people to venture off and start their own businesses" is warranted; we can surely say that in our own voice. Ping me when rectified. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:31, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Sammi Brie: Thanks very much for doing this review. I have added a cite for the CA Optimizer II parenthetical. That text dates to the old article, before it got redirected, which liked to point out what happened after the CA acquisition. I suspect that the Earwig hit you got was copying in the other direction, i.e. something that was taken from that old article, but just to be sure I have modified the wording somewhat. As for the long quote, I thought those authors said it better than I could in this instance. Wasted Time R (talk) 22:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @Wasted Time R: That would make sense. Is there a cite for The most well-known of each of these were Optimizer, Capex's post-code generation phase object code optimizer for the IBM COBOL compiler, and AutoTab, an early batch spreadsheet program. ? I did a bit of reorganizing to improve the flow in that area, and that needs a cite. Otherwise it's ready. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:36, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • @Sammi Brie: There isn't an explicit cite for that. Rather, it's the conclusion given by the relative weight of the available sources on the company and hence the relative amount of text in this article. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:51, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1: ... that the Optimizer by Capex Corporation brought memory and runtime savings to COBOL programs running on IBM mainframes?
@Sammi Brie: I disagree re the synth, but won't argue; I have reworked the text and that sentence is gone. Re ALT1, that's fine with me. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Everything looks good but someone else must review my ALT1. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Phisuea Samut

(
)
The statue of Phisuea Samut in Ko Samet, Thailand
The statue of Phisuea Samut in Ko Samet, Thailand

Created by Taung Tan (talk). Self-nominated at 20:50, 16 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Phisuea Samut; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough (but misplaced; it was created on 10 February and nominated on 16 February). Long enough. The prose section is mostly a summary of the legend about Phisuea Samut, and could gain from some context. It simply starts with "Legend tells the story" which seems an odd way to put it. What legend, told by whom, in what context? I think some background would be needed here. Also, I would remove the work "masterpiece" in the lead, unless possibly if you can show through sources that it is broadly considered a masterpiece by critics or in some other relevant way. "Mother Sea Butterfly" in bold should reasonably be placed in the lead, if I interpret the MOS correctly. The hook is supported by inline citations AGF, and the wording is fine. However I lack an inline source supporting the claim that it is an "ogress". QPQ perhaps done but the link is red, so please clarify this. So in all a few things to fix before I will take another look. Good luck! Yakikaki (talk) 09:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yakikaki Qpq has been completed and some errors have been corrected. Taung Tan (talk) 07:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Taung Tan. The QPQ is now done. However, you didn't really address my concerns above. I also have further ones: note 1 needs to be rephrased, I don't understand what it means. Is it the case that Phisuea Samut is called "Mother Sea Butterfly" because of a linguistic similarity between the word "butterfly" and "ghost" in Thai language? What do you mean by "(not an insect)"? Maybe you can elaborate? I also think you need to explain more clearly who erected the statues, and when. It is very vague the way it is written now, again some context would be useful. But perhaps the sources are vague on this point? In that case you could rephrase it as something like "At one point, statues started to be erected..." or some such. Kind regards, Yakikaki (talk) 09:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 17[edit]

Brightwell Manor

(
)
Brightwell Manor from the village churchyard in 2008
Brightwell Manor from the village churchyard in 2008

Created by Edwardx (talk), KJP1 (talk), and Philafrenzy (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 23:20, 24 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Brightwell Manor; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg @Edwardx: Nominated a little late but I'm fine with that – long enough, although just barely, neutral and sourced. Doesn't appear to be a copyvio and the pic is nice and meets the criteria. QPQ done. The only issue is that the hook needs to be sourced in the article (the sentence His wife wrote in her diary "It is a most attractive house but rather small." and that she had written to Paul Edward Paget and his partner John Seely (later John Seely, 2nd Baron Mottistone) about adding to it needs a reference) – and could you show me which source says that? Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:54, 24 February 2023 (UTC) BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:54, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Thank you, BeanieFan11. If you search Google Books for "Brightwell Manor most attractive house but rather small" it will come up. It is on p236 of Adam Fox's 1960 book about Inge. But, I'm struggling to add the ref correctly to the article itself, such that you can click through to it from there. Edwardx (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see now. Also, I've added the ref for that sentence, as the DYK rules require, so now it appears to be good to go! Symbol confirmed.svg BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:06, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It doesn't seem like google books gives many people access to that book, only through the snipping view. So I don't think there's a way you could add it allowing people to read it. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
BeanieFan11, it only gives me a snipping view too, but it is enough to show the salient fact in support of the hook. Edwardx (talk) 00:16, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I gave the hook a tweak. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The original hook is making a small joke that only works in the top spot, but really the content of the hook isn't weighty enough to support that position. We should also attribute the words properly to the author, Mary Inge, or be accused of sexism. What about:
ALT1 ... that Brightwell Manor (pictured) was the home of a eugenicist clergyman who did not believe in democracy, or women's rights? Article would need expanding in this respect.
ALT2 ... that Boris Johnson has agreed to buy Brightwell Manor (pictured) which was once in the ownership of a eugenicist clergyman who did not believe in democracy, or women's rights? Philafrenzy (talk) 18:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Needs reviewer for new ALT hooks. (Unless BeanieFan11 doesn't mind having another look?) Cielquiparle (talk) 12:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Balanica

(
)

Created by PajaBG (talk). Self-nominated at 19:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Balanica; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - n
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @PajaBG: Good article but it doesn't look like the sources verify the hooks. Can you provide new sources or an exaplanation? Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

forgot to mention but there looks to also be lots of copyright issues. That will need to be addressed too. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Onegreatjoke:. Hook 1. Source [17], in its Discussion segment, names only Sima de los Huesos and Mauer as older (per maximal minimum range). Source [18], in the very first line says "Mala Balanica, koja krije tajne trećeg najstarijeg ljudskog fosila u Evropi...", meaning "Mala Balanica, which hides secrets of the third oldest human fossil in Europe...".
Hook 2. Source [19] in its segment Cultural connections in the Middle Paleolithic era, though they say, "Neanderthals or some other species". Source [20] cites University of Belgrade's Faculty of Philosophy's statement which basically says the same as the previous source, "neandertalci ili druge vrste ljudi" meaning "Neanderthals or other species of humans". Source [21], head of the Serbian team Dušan Mihajlović also talks about the connections and says the project, of which the Balanica caves survey is part of, is called ""Neanderthal and Early Modern Human interactions in the Central Balkans". So, maybe Hook 2 could add "early" before "modern humans". Also, the last source gives the range of this happening from 300,000 to 240,000, so maybe that can be added, too. I left both out due to the length issues.
It is hard to rewrite scientific texts into your own words, replacing every single word with its synonym. I do try it and spend a lot of time on it, but frankly, I don't really care about, however it is called here, copyright, plagiarism, etc. Despite being imperfect to the perfection, Wikipedia is world's Number 1 starting point for knowledge. So, if we cite some scientists, and properly reference them, with links to their papers and journals, what's the fuss? They should say thank you. For whom are they making discoveries? If that was the point of mentioned "copyright issues". Real, printed, general encyclopedias never referenced anything, maybe just had a general list of literature listed at the end. At least in my part of the world, they were there to spread knowledge. Plus, this is just DYK, I didn't nominate it for GA or something. Take care! PajaBG (talk) 20:05, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Manga Up!

(
)

Created by Link20XX (talk). Self-nominated at 00:09, 18 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Manga Up!; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - See below.
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Article created on 17 February, and meets the length requirement. Earwig reveals no copyvio and I didn't spot any instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing. All sources are, as far as I can tell, reliable for the material they are cited for (but see below). QPQ has been done. There are some content issues:

  • The article describes it as a website, but the sources say it's an app.
  • However, the service was criticized for its censorship and monetization. – "however"?
  • Fullmetal Alchemist, Magical Circle Guru Guru, Inu × Boku SS, Blast of Tempest, Daily Lives of High School Boys, and Sumomomo, Momomo were available on the service upon release. – that's basically just a laundry list.
  • An English version – I would say "English-language" for clarity.
  • launched on July 26, 2022 – the source says it was released "on Monday". July 26, 2022 was a Tuesday.
  • serializes original series – redundant phrasing.
  • Japanese website Appmedia praised the works and free content of the app, particularly its fantasy and horror works. – did it? I'm admittedly relying on a machine translation, but it seems more like description than praise to me.
  • many outlets criticized its censorship – the cited sources don't back this up. They do back up that many users criticized it.
  • many critics pointed out that the censorship included knees and jeans – the sourcing does not back up that many critics said this, specifically.
  • knees and jeans – "knees" is properly sourced, but "jeans" is not. The cited sources do not discuss the censorship of jeans, but one of them includes this tweet. That tweet would not be sufficient sourcing on its own, and being included in one of the cited sources without further commentary does not change that.
  • neither of which are erotic – that's an opinion.
  • I would include Faulkner's assessment that the censorship was probably done by machine.
  • entire chapters that were mostly censored – not really what Faulkner says. Faulkner says characters that show cleavage, like Marin from the top-rated My Dress Up Darling series, can spend entire chapters mostly obscured, a weaker statement.

Ping Link20XX. TompaDompa (talk) 18:48, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @TompaDompa: Thanks for your review. I changed the description in the first sentence from website to service as that better describes the topic, I removed "however" and the redundant word "original" and added "English-language" as you suggested. I also removed the laundry list of titles and changed the release date to July 25, 2022 (the proper date). I removed the note about Appmedia as it did not praise the service for that particularly, though the rest of the statement should be okay. I also changed "outlets" to "users" to better match the sources and removed "many" for the same reason. I removed the line about knees and jeans being errotic and and changed the bit about Falkner's opinion, toning it down and noting his machine assessment. Lastly, regarding the censorship, I changed "knees and jeans" to "knees and elbows" as I can't verify jeans outside of the Tweet, though elbows is mentioned in the ComicBook.com article here, which states However, these boxes are also present on bodies even if they're totally covered, and some even cover unexpected areas like elbows and knees. As such, I would like to propose an alternative hook similar to the one above, ALT1: ... that censorship on Manga Up! included elbows and knees? based on the change. Link20XX (talk) 19:30, 18 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol question.svg @Link20XX: I'll have to WP:AGF on Appmedia (is it really praise and not just a description?), and Faulkner says that characters rather than chapters are mostly obscured. Other than that, my sourcing concerns have all been taken care of, and no obvious neutrality issues remain. ALT1 is both interesting and properly sourced. This will be ready once the Faulkner stuff is fixed. As a further improvement, I would suggest saying "monetization model" rather than just "monetization" in the WP:LEAD. TompaDompa (talk) 16:26, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @TompaDompa: I have made all of the suggested edits. Link20XX (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 ready. TompaDompa (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          Symbol question.svg @Link20XX and TompaDompa: I don't think "censorship included" is grammatically correct on its own. It's like you're missing some words, e.g. "targets of censorship included..." Cielquiparle (talk) 15:52, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          Can't say I see a problem. "Was there censorship? Yes, including elbows and knees." seems fine to me, as would "[...] including of elbows and knees." I wouldn't object to rephrasing it, but I don't think it's necessary either. TompaDompa (talk) 17:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 18[edit]

The Day of Books and Roses

(
)
Book signing in Catalonia on the Day of Books and Roses
Book signing in Catalonia on the Day of Books and Roses

Created by Bridges2Information (talk). Self-nominated at 19:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Day of Books and Roses (Catalonia); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 19[edit]

Oscar Holmes

(
)

Created by Clarityfiend (talk). Self-nominated at 17:41, 25 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Oscar Holmes; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Clarityfiend: Good article. Though, what makes Black Past a reliable source? Also, I may be confused but does the article contradict with Jesse L. Brown, I may be dumb here. Minor comment that isn't DYK mandatory, "He was survived by his wife and their three[3] or four[5] children." should probably be rid of per WP:SURVIVEDBY. QPQ also needed. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Onegreatjoke: Have you read BlackPast.org? The Library of Congress and the New York Public Library reference librarians consider it reliable. As for SURVIVEDBY, that's a bit nitpicky, but okay. I'll rephrase it. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As for Jesse Brown, the distinction appears to be due to the fact that Holmes was already a pilot when he enlisted, hence he didn't need flight training. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Clarityfiend: Alright, I still need a QPQ though. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Onegreatjoke: QPQ done. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:19, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Desert of Maine

(
)
Desert Of Maine
Desert Of Maine

Improved to Good Article status by AverageEstoniaEnthusiast (talk). Self-nominated at 23:33, 19 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Desert of Maine; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Drive-by comment (not a full review): (1) "only desert in New England" does not appear in the article, and needs to before this hook can be approved; (2) quora is not a reliable source, and neither is the YouTube video used as a reference in the article. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:13, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Symbol possible vote.svg AverageEstoniaEnthusiast Welcome. Regarding the hook it is catchy and would be a quirky hook, however it needs to be in the article. The article has the correct inline citations and is neutral. Recently promoted to GA so it fits our criteria for inclusion. First DYK nomination so a QPQ is not needed. Since there is no RS which states the hook it needs a reference. The article and hook are interesting. In addition to the hook I have a concern about a copyright violation, the detector picks up. See here. Bruxton (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I edited the source and hook. The readability of the hook might be a little bit wonky, so let me know if you want it changed. I will start working on filtering out the plagiarism in the article.AverageEstoniaEnthusiast (talk) 03:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • After doing a bit of investigating, I found that the version with the 'plagiarized' information was actually fully stolen from the Wikipedia article at the time. To be fair, the "Random Times" sounds pretty sketchy, so a stunt like this is most definitely something they would do. For proof of this, see Revision as of 14:17, 3 February 2021 Basically exactly what Crescent77 said.

It's pretty clear the article of copyright concern is copypasta that takes most of its material from WP, most of the rest from sources referenced here. Alot of the material in question has been on WP for years, while the article of concern is only a little more than a year old. Crescent77 (talk) 03:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed a youtube reference see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Bruxton (talk) 18:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From WP:RSPYT: "Content uploaded from a verified official account ... may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability." The content being cited comes from the management of the attraction, which would be an unreliable source for anything with promotional tendencies, but I think it can be accepted for something as neutral as when the attraction got its current name. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 20:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bryanrutherford0, AverageEstoniaEnthusiast, and David Eppstein: Bryanrutherford0 you have left out the most important part of WP:RSPYT where they give an example of a verified account that is acceptable such as that of a news organization. This video is a YouTube cartoon created by a privately owned company. Is it really needed for the article? It seems easy to replace this with another reference and maybe move this YouTube video to external links? The article is somewhat incomplete (D7) in that we also do not list the recent new owners or previous owners in the article. Also here is an archived Boston Magazine article about the place. Possibly some lines in that article would support ALT0 with cultural definitions of desert. I hope to approve a new hook or find support for ALT0, but we have these other issues to sort out. Bruxton (talk) 00:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A news organization is, indeed, mentioned as an example of a source that might post Youtube content that might be relevant to a WP article, but the guideline certainly doesn't say, "Only content from news organizations has the potential to be cited in a WP article." The citation is used to support the assertion of the date of origin of the attraction's current name, and refusing to accept a business's assertion of its own date of establishment, in the absence of controversy or conflicting published claims, seems excessively pedantic to me. As for whether it's needed, not at all, if you're aware of another published source that documents the same fact. The attraction's owners aren't notable, and there would be nothing to say about them beyond their names, which would add nothing to the article for any reader not already personally acquainted with them. Given how little the article would gain in context from the inclusion of a non-notable name, I incline in the direction of respecting the privacy of persons who aren't the subject of the article, as discussed at WP:LPNAME. The Boston Magazine piece looks like an excellent find, and should definitely be used to improve the article. -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 01:11, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks @Bryanrutherford0:, our article does not say that this is privately owned until the end of the article I think it should be in the lead. The privacy of the owners is probably out the window when they have RS about them. I will await a new ALT or support for ALT0 and I will not edit war the YouTube source. I think if it can be replaced it should be. Two editors here have called it out as red. I am but one editor here and whatever I approve will get scrutinized by an admin queue promotor and then it will be subject to errors. Perhaps the nominator can return to add information and get a hook back on track? Bruxton (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do agree with Bryan Rutherford that YT is an acceptable source in this case, but I did find an alternate to keep folks happy.

I agree with Bruxton that the lede should indicate the site is privately owned, so I edited as such.

I agree with Bryan Rutherford that the inclusion of a list of owners is both unneccesary and undesirable.

Crescent77 (talk) 03:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you @Crescent77: I appreciate your efforts and thank you for the opinion. I think the ownership is is more about adding the timeline of ownership, and maybe the 2018 price, 725k. Also these articles list property amenities like a gift shop and barn which is more than 225 years old, which are not in the article. 1, 2. It is about the article being complete (D7). ATM, we are giving the article the appearance that this is some geology museum and not a private business. So that is where my confusion came in. When I first read the article this seemed like a park, not a private business. Even now it also uses a museum infobox. It calls the area a "Geology museum" in the infobox, but Geology museum is not mentioned or referenced in our article. The owners make no such claim, they simply call the place a "Tourist Attraction". The article is also listed in three museum categories. But Museum is not mentioned or referenced at all in our article. If this is a museum or geology museum, that should be made clear in the article. Bruxton (talk) 16:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bryanrutherford0, AverageEstoniaEnthusiast, and Crescent77: The nomination has been stalled just shy of three weeks without action. The unaddressed issue is outlined above and I am wondering if anyone plans edit the article so that the nomination can proceed. This is strictly a tourist attraction but the article is in three museum categories- those should be removed. I see that "Geology museum" has been removed from the infobox so that is one step. Our article probably should also use the "attraction" Template:Infobox attraction and not the museum one. Our article should make it clear that this is not a museum and it is a tourist attraction. Bruxton (talk) 01:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bruxton, I'm wearing my editor hat and not my DYK hat, so this is not a re-review. That said, I made the changes mentioned above. AEE already implemented the infobox fix, and I fixed the cats and moved the YouTube video to the EL section. I don't think there's anything left that suggests this is a museum. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:49, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Firefangledfeathers: thank you much, please review - I think all they need is a hook that is in the article. Bruxton (talk) 01:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT0 has been edited since the first reviewers looked at it, and I think it's supported now. We could also do:
  • ALT1: ... that there is a "desert" in Maine?
    • as a final slot hook maybe? The hookiness does depend on basic reader awareness of Maine climate/geography though.
  • ALT2 ... that a farm was treated so poorly that it turned into the Desert of Maine?
Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AverageEstoniaEnthusiast and Crescent77: Checking if you like either of these. Bruxton (talk) 13:44, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The participants have not responded to me for three weeks so I request a re-review from another editor. Bruxton (talk) 16:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aubri Esters

(
)

Created by Elttaruuu (talk). Self-nominated at 06:08, 19 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Aubri Esters; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Question?
Overall: Symbol delete vote.svg @Elttaruuu: Thanks for contributing to DYK; your article needs some copy editing as the [earwig score] is exceeding the limit. RV (talk) 09:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thank you very much for the revision. It appears to be satisfactory to me, and I've marked it for review. RV (talk) 02:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 20[edit]

Ruth Scott Miller

(
)
  • ... that Ruth Scott Miller was the first female music critic for the Chicago Tribune, writing for the paper from September 1920 to May 1921? Source: Hannah Edgar, “Searching for Ms. Miller”, Chicago Magazine, November 19, 2020.
    • Reviewed: exempt

Created by Treesiati (talk). Self-nominated at 21:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ruth Scott Miller; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Treesiati: Hi, reviewing now; I made some copyedits while reading. Symbol question.svg New, long enough. The tag about primary sources does need remedying; for example, the claim "Her last contribution to the Ladies’ Home Journal was in 1927" can't really be cited using the article itself, even if it's true - either a secondary source should be found, or (less preferably) the claim should be modified to something like "She contributed to Ladies' Home Journal until at least 1927". Also, I think it would help other editors to use citation templates, but that's not a requirement for DYK; however, please do include the author's name in every reference when possible, even for Miller herself. A few other general things or points of fact:
  • Where are we citing her date of birth?
  • Can St. Veit be linked to somewhere? On google I'm only finding places in Austria, not Germany
  • "The editors of the Chicago Tribune noted that Miller came to their attention through her articles in the Saturday Evening Post" - wait, which did she write for first, the Post or the Tribune?
  • Change curly quotes to straight quotes
  • The Hannah Edgar article seems interesting; you could incorporate some more biographical details from it (husband's early death, later life in Virginia, writing style, etc.)
  • The proposed hook is not very interesting, but you can probably create some good hook suggestions from her published opinions. No QPQ needed; second nomination. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 03:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Destination (game)

(
)

5x expanded by MB190417 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:21, 21 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Destination (game); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment. It wasn't the game that entered administration, rather, it was the publisher RTL Games that did so. Mindmatrix 16:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @MB190417: Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough. Not quite long enough though - the before version is 1458 chars, and it's currently around 4,230 (2.9x expansion, 7290 is the target). Possible additions: the Dragon's Den story, and the irony of her success after, might be expandable and interesting; a Reception section might be useful if possible; perhaps briefly describe some elements of gameplay variations in the most notable editions. Otherwise well written (I did small copyedits) and cited - the Amazon links seem fine, though WP:RSPAMAZON suggests just citing the product itself. No QPQ needed; first nomination. As implied above, new suggestions for hooks are welcome. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 03:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Hameltion, thank you so much for your review and helpful copyedits to the article. I'm very sorry not to have checked the expansion rate: that was silly of me; I had assumed I had easily expanded by 5x! The article should now meet eligibility at 7362 B (diff from your review), though further copyediting may be welcomed.
I've added further information across the history section, as well as a new paragraph on gameplay variations as you suggested. Unfortunately, I couldn't find much by way of a section on Reception, with surprisingly few comments in local newspapers that might have been expected to report on the launches of local editions (there were probably more sources 10 years ago when new versions of the game were being released, so I feel like we are constrained to a smaller pool!).
I wasn't sure how to interpret WP:RSPAMAZON for a board game, seeing as the guidance seems to have in mind printed sources such as books rather than products; for disclosure, I've cited Amazon as a source in the new paragraph on gameplay variations, specifically using information from the image of the gameplay manual for Destination Hogwarts. But I think this is still in-keeping with the spirit of WP:RSPAMAZON.
Once again, thank you so much for your review and copyedits, and I am sorry not to have been careful to check the expansion rate! _MB190417_ (talk)
@MB190417: No worries. Size approx. 7350+ now, the added material all looks good. Symbol question.svg Last thing basically is to propose one or more alternative hooks for me to sign off on. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 23:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great, thanks! Here are a few:
  • ALT1: ... that the publisher of Destination, a bestselling taxi-based board game, entered administration after the film release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince was delayed by eight months?
  • ALT2: ... that Destination became Hamleys' bestselling board game three months after its investment pitch was rejected on television?
  • ALT3: ... that a BBC investigation on bank irresponsibility changed the fate of Destination, a bestselling taxi-inspired board game? _MB190417_ (talk) 01:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. These are better, but want something snappier (either revision or new). Also, in ALT1 it's not clear that the delay caused the legal action, and "administration" is not familiar in the US; ALT2 is smart but it seems the episode aired after the game came out, so maybe reword but keep the meaning; and ALT3 is fairly vague ("changed the fate"). Hameltion (talk | contribs) 02:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway

(
)

Created by Red-tailed hawk (talk). Self-nominated at 05:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article new and long enough - I would shorten the hook as it repeats some information in the body verbatim, but not a disqualifier. Copyvio not detected, hook interesting. QPQ done, and hook verified in source cited + mentioned in article. The two sources linked above isn't inline cited to the hook fact in article, but the existing one does so no issue there. Good to go. Juxlos (talk) 08:59, 20 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Just a quick comment, but the hook can be further shortened by converting the measurements into numerals. It's not that common to spell out compound fractions like that. Thus:
    ... that the completion of the Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway will reduce typical travel time from Madagascar's capital to its largest port by between 5.5 and 7.5 hours?
    Imzadi 1979 → 17:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Works for me. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 23:01, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol possible vote.svg @Red-tailed hawk and Juxlos: Unfortunately this hook cannot run as is. At the moment, it sounds like Wikipedia is making a prediction in wikivoice about a highway that has not been completed yet. As we all know, large public infrastructure projects are often political footballs – governments and various parties often make claims about future expected benefits that don't always pan out. It's also possible that the highway will not be completed. I'm not even sure if it's ok to feature this article on the main page, given that it's about a highway that hasn't been built/isn't in operation yet, but at minimum the hook would need to be modified in some way. Cielquiparle (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Would that the completion of the Antananarivo–Toamasina toll highway will reduce typical travel time from Madagascar's capital to its largest port by between 5.5 and 7.5 hours, per Madagascar's government work better for you? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 13:21, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Formatting the hook above as ALT0b (with further tweaks to stay within the 200 character limit) and proposing a few other modifications:
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Need another editor to review and approve (or propose more ALT hooks). Cielquiparle (talk) 18:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 21[edit]

Articles created/expanded on February 22[edit]

Quarterback (TV series)

(
)
Patrick Mahomes
Patrick Mahomes

Created by Soulbust (talk). Self-nominated at 19:46, 1 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Quarterback (TV series); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough (just), long enough. Early spotchecks found no issues, however oddly enough it's the sentences relating to hook ALT2 that have the closest paraphrasing. The sentences on microphones need rewriting. The ALT2 hook is the most interesting of the above, and by itself does not appear to be a close paraphrase. QPQ not done. CMD (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
QPQ completed. Soulbust (talk) 08:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thierry Coquand

(
)

5x expanded by Partofthemachine (talk). Self-nominated at 17:25, 25 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Thierry Coquand; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg The hook as currently written is not intriguing to a non-specialist audience considering it assumes reader familiarity with all the terms and names mentioned in the hook. Otherwise the article meets DYK requirements and is free from close paraphrasing. The nominator has no prior DYK nominations so a QPQ is not required. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While more understandable, I'm not really sure if it's still interesting to a non-specialist audience. Given that this is tech-related I'd like to hear DigitalIceAge's thoughts on ALT1. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree that the hooks require foreknowledge of SIGPLAN and its eminence to be interesting. Why not mention something about Coq itself? E.g.
ALT2: ... that Thierry Coquand's namesake Coq proof assistant was used to find a formal proof of the four color theorem? Or if we want to mention the award, we can say
ALT2b: ... that Thierry Coquand won a SIGPLAN award for his eponymous Coq proof assistant, which was used to find a formal proof of the four color theorem? A bit long but more interesting IMO. DigitalIceAge (talk) 01:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I personally like ALT2b the best. Partofthemachine (talk) 22:09, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I like both ALT2s better than the ALT1 I proposed. Is there a typo in it? ("formal proof of*...")? Only other concern is if there's an issue calling it "his" as he's among several creators. Wracking 💬 22:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm not sure how I missed that, my apologies. This is ready for a full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

African Space Agency

(
)

Created by Chipmunkdavis (talk). Self-nominated at 12:30, 23 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/African Space Agency; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - The hook teases with its talk of a space city. The reader is likely to be disappointed that the article has a red link for this. Perhaps this should be unlinked and the section expanded to give them more details of the space city.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg The biggest issue is balance as there seems to be plenty of negative opinion out there. Also, I'm not understanding the reference to Jailangkung in the nominator's comment. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, that was the QPQ, I must have put it in the wrong box. Regarding neutrality, those are older articles of the sort of discussion that always precedes the creation of any body (is it necessary, what would it do, etc.). The opposition was the same as it always is for these projects, money better elsewhere, another white elephant sort of thing. I don't see that as due. I also haven't put any positive opinion in. In both cases, as the org was just founded, there isn't much actually behind it either way (well, a delay of opening from 2022 to 2023, but again that is reasonably routine and I haven't seen any source call it out). On the Space City, it's a newly built complex that also holds the Egyptian Space Agency. I can add more to this article, and alternatively I suppose an article could be created for it; I thought it worth a red link although I'm not 100% on how notability for that sort of infrastructure development. CMD (talk) 00:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wondered if Jailangkung was the QPQ but didn't recognise your abbreviated sig of CMD there. I've updated the review now to acknowledge this.
But I'm still not content with the other issues. I'll look at the topic more closely myself.
Andrew🐉(talk) 17:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rosa Smester Marrero

(
)

Created by Rafird (talk). Nominated by MB190417 (talk) at 22:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Rosa Smester Marrero; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

will review this FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:26, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg (hook brainstorming) Well-written article and kudos MB190417 for rescuing the article . Learned a lot. some minor comments (1) re-upload the image as a non-free image if you do not know if it is free or not given the that the subject is dead. Use this link and take this image as a reference of how to fill the required info. here also some alternatives. (2) can you address the reliability of reference no. 6 and 9 (preferably on Talk:Rosa Smester Marrero and why you think it can be accepted, or please provide a better reference?

Hi @FuzzyMagma, thanks for your very kind review. I've reuploaded the image, and removed the claims previously tagged with "better source needed" (further explanation is provided on the talk page). Please note too that I came across another book which - thank heavens - published two of Smester's works, so the article has now been further expanded, and may require further copyedits. New additions mostly discuss her views of feminism, motherhood, gender roles, and teaching; here is the diff since your review. As for ALT1, this now includes a claim retracted from the article, so here are some other alternatives:
@MB190417: great work, thanks for adding the picture and for elaborating more on your sources in the page talk. Truly great work. if you improved the lede and dug some details about her early life, I think there is a chance this can be a good article. I might come later and help. As for now, I did some light copy editing and removed some typos. All new ALT are referenced, and I like ALT2 and ALT4. We can make it more dramatic/controversial by ALT5: ... that Rosa Smester Marrero, a prominent Dominican feminist, believed motherhood is a woman's "true mission" and a woman's life devoid of maternal work is "useless"?
I will leave it to you to decide between ALT 2, 4, and 5. FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:41, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Far from making it dramatic/controversial, I would say ALT5 just makes it both tedious and offensive to those of us who have heard this far too many times. There are lots of catchy alternatives, let's use them. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 14:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 23[edit]

Admiral's Walk

(
)

Created by Edwardx (talk), Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Edwardx (talk) at 21:12, 2 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Admiral's Walk; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg... New enough, long enough, no copyvio issues, hooks in article and followed by citations to hook facts. I made some slight formatting adjustments to references as I went through them but did not change any text (someone else can review if necessary). Let me know when article complete for review and when QPQ done. Whispyhistory (talk) 05:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Matt Hicks (basketball)

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 03:04, 2 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Matt Hicks (basketball); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg @TonyTheTiger: Good article. AGF on sources since I can't access ProQuest. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's OK to Be Angry About Capitalism

(
)
Bernie Sanders in 2020
Bernie Sanders in 2020

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 01:38, 23 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/It's OK to Be Angry About Capitalism; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment: Personally, I'm not impressed by either ALT1 or ALT2. ALT1 is pretty uninteresting/expected as far as critiques of capitalist wealth go. ALT2, on the other hand, feels like a violation of WP:NPOV, April fools or not. _MB190417_ (talk) 15:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Fair points. I prefer ALT0 but will try to brainstorm some others in case that's not seen as appropriate for the main page. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      I agree with MB190417, and honestly I'd say ALT0 has the same pitfall as ALT1. This is an entire book — surely Sanders has included some amusing anecdote or unexpected fact that would make for a catchy hook? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I think I've covered all of the significant anecdotes as reported by the reliable sources. So, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ – Muboshgu (talk) 21:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I will say the sources easily check out in terms of reliability and high quality, and it is properly-written. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 22:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, and earwig compliant; I have some concerns about the sourcing, though. You seem to be citing quite a few sources that either unreliable or don't demonstrate due weight of the facts they support due to partisanship, including Rolling Stone and WCIV (SBG-owned). I also agree with the above that the hooks presented don't really fly, so it would be nice if others could be fine (although the article is pretty content-heavy). A QPQ has been done – nice work so far, Muboshgu! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I'll take a look at the sources and try to think of another hook. I don't see a problem with using Rolling Stone or a Sinclair-owned station given the contents and plenty of strong sources are used, like the Guardian, Fortune, NYT, NPR, New York magazine. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 24[edit]

The 1619 Project (TV series)

(
)

Created by Cielquiparle (talk). Self-nominated at 10:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The 1619 Project (TV series); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - just a suggestion

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Cielquiparle: Good article. Though, I believe that the hook would benefit better from an explanation on what the controversy is supposed to be or why it wants to spark controversy. Simply just saying controversy I feel isn't interesting enough. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Monster Max

(
)

5x expanded by HumanxAnthro (talk). Self-nominated at 22:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Monster Max; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - Concision preferred.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Great work expanding the article. Sourced, neutral, and free of plagiarism. A couple of issues. First, is there a reason for the unusual notes section in this article? It seems like they could just as well have been cited as a normal reference rather than note. Second, while this article has been greatly expanded, it is about 200 words short of being expanded by 5 times. I think it would also be clearer and more concise to refer to the game by name in the ALT, rather than by euphemism. CurryTime7-24 (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

CurryTime7-24, thanks for the comments! The reason I was not explicit with the name was that I assumed readers would be way more interested in the being-compared-to-Zelda part. 200 words? Wow, that's close. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 20:38, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Got it. Well, referring to the game euphemistically gives greater attention to Link's Awakening than this game. After all, Monster Max is the star of this DYK. ;) As for the expansion being short by ca. 200 words, I don't think it would be tough to pad this article just a little more in order to reach the threshold. It's not a big deal to me personally, but I don't want this DYK nom to be derailed by another editor on a technicality. Again, great work here overall. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
CurryTime7-24 Honestly, I think this article is as complete as it could be, so you can cancel this nomination. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 14:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I meant "200 characters". I'm very sorry about my mix-up of words. You've added enough since you submitted this DYK to meet the threshold. So all I'm waiting for now is for you to improve the ALT. I'm ready to review and approve once you're set! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 18:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, well in that case, let me submit a new ALT.
ALT1 That some critics considered Monster Max to be the closest in quality to The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening over any other Game Boy game, some even greater than?User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 18:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1Point3Acres

(
)
  • ... that the Chinese-language forum 1Point3Acres created a COVID-19 tracker that the CDC used? Source: Chen, Pingying 陈娉莹; Shen, Kai 沈开 (2020-06-09). "华人团队构建全球疫情实时追踪系统 已被CDC、JHU使用" [The Chinese team built a real-time global epidemic tracking system, which has been used by CDC and JHU]. Chinese edition of Scientific American (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-02-24. Retrieved 2023-02-24.

    The article notes: "在新冠肺炎肆虐全球之际，一群在美留学生、华人为主的志愿者团队在北美华人网站“一亩三分地”的组织下，于 2020 年 1 月底开始汇总搜集北美实时疫情信息，整合全球数据，搭建了目前全世界最实时、广泛、地理区分度最细的新冠疫情追踪平台——“一亩三分地”新型冠状病毒世界疫情动态追踪平台 CovidNet（网址：https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/ ），受到国际用户一致好评。如今，CovidNet 已成为约翰霍普金斯大学（JHU）疫情追踪平台和维基百科新冠全球大流行页面的北美数据主要引用来源，并成为美国疾控中心（CDC）使用参考数据来源之一。目前该数据库已有超过 2.25 亿访问量，并且被 522 个组织或机构使用。相关预印本已在 arXiv 发布。一亩三分地（1point3acres）”是汇集留学、就业、移民信息的北美华人论坛。..."

    From Google Translate: "When COVID-19 is raging around the world, a group of Chinese-dominated volunteer teams studying in the United States, under the organization of the North American Chinese website 1Point3Acres, began to collect real-time pandemic information in North America at the end of January 2020, and integrated the global The data has built the world's most real-time, extensive, and geographically differentiated new crown epidemic tracking platform - "one acre and three points of land" new coronavirus world epidemic dynamic tracking platform CovidNet (website: https://coronavirus.1point3acres .com/ ), well received by international users. Today, CovidNet is the primary cited source for North American data on the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) outbreak tracking platform and Wikipedia's new crown global pandemic page, and one of the reference data sources used by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The database currently has more than 225 million visits and is used by 522 organizations or institutions. Related preprints have been posted on arXiv. ..."1point3acres" is a North American Chinese forum that gathers information on studying abroad, employment, and immigration."

Created by Cunard (talk). Self-nominated at 09:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/1Point3Acres; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • The hook doesn’t work for an international audience. Why would readers outside the US know what the CDC is? Schwede66 17:29, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 25[edit]

Qnat

(
)
[[File:|140px|Qnat, Lebanon from the west ]]
Qnat, Lebanon from the west
  • ... that during the Battle of Qnat, a group of 44 Lebanese resistance fighters stood up to a 3,000-strong Syrian brigade? Source: Clovis Choueifaty, This is how the Free Resistance faced the Assad army in Lebanon (Beirut, 2017)
    • Reviewed:

Created by PalauanReich (talk). Self-nominated at 02:48, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Qnat; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: Red XN - The one giant paragraph in the History section has all its reference lumped at the end. I understand that often sources are reworked and mixed, making it impractical to identify a specific source for each statement. This giant paragraph should be broken up into more reasonable paragraph sizes, which will then also allow the references to be more specific.
  • Neutral: Red XN - The History section is not entirely NPOV, problem terms: "surprisingly effective", "martyred".
  • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Green tickY

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - As a result of the huge history paragraph, it is impossible to check if the hook is properly cited. Policy requires that "the hook must be supported in the article by at least one inline citation to a reliable source, appearing no later than the end of the sentence(s) offering that fact."
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - The numbers in the hook are not mentioned in the article!

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Thank you for working hard on this new geography article! Please modify the huge History paragraph by breaking it up into a few smaller paragraphs, adding the appropriate references. The hook itself must be in the article - if no sources back up the total number of fighters (from both sides!), then the hook needs to be rewritten. Remove the copyvio image. Other general improvement suggestions (not related to this DYK): add vital statistics and demographics, and Economy section. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 16:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Myat Phaya Gyi

(
)
Princess Myat Phaya Gyi
Princess Myat Phaya Gyi

Created by Taung Tan (talk). Self-nominated at 16:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Myat Phaya Gyi; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg The size and freshness is good for DYK. The prose is well referenced and no copyvio was observed. The article reads "Myat Phaya Gyi fell in love with Gopal Bhaurao Sawant, an Indian palace gatekeeper, in 1906, when she was 26 years old, and had a child with him. At the time, he was already married." It's not clear how they married if the guy had a wife and the sentence implies the two had child before marriage. Please correct me if it's wrong. Also waiting for the QPQ. --Mhhossein talk 06:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Mhhossein, The reason why the princess never married him was because he already had a legal wife, which she was unaware of during their love affair. During that time, the gatekeeper pretended to be single in order to win the heart of the princess. Taung Tan (talk) 18:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the explanations Taung Tan, so why does the hook say they got married? --Mhhossein talk 06:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My apology my misatke. fixed. Taung Tan (talk) 08:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 26[edit]

Zandra Flemister

(
)

Created by Topshelver (talk). Self-nominated at 02:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Zandra Flemister; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough, (barely) long enough, and not a stub. QPQ done. I'm wary of "first X to do Y" hooks, but I think this one is interesting enough. Properly sourced. However, there appears to be some inappropriate copying or close paraphrasing from the Washington Post obituary: compare our article "Consul General in Pakistan and worked as the senior State Department representative at the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center in Washington" with WaPo "consul general in Islamabad, Pakistan, and in Washington as the senior State Department representative at the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center"; compare also our article "affidavit in support of a class action lawsuit alleging rampant racial discrimination within the Secret Service" with WaPo "affidavit filed in support of a class-action lawsuit ... that alleged rampant racial discrimination within the Secret Service". This needs to be fixed before this can be promoted. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@David Eppstein: Thanks for the review. I made some edits - please take a look and let me know if additional edits are needed. Topshelver (talk) 13:12, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is the kind of edit one makes when trying to hide plagiarism, rather than to avoid it. It keeps the overall sentence structure the same and merely replaces some words with synonyms. All content must be written in your own words, based on your understanding of the sources, rather than merely copying the source material and making cosmetic edits to disguise the fact that it is copied. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on February 27[edit]

Fraszki

(
)
Title page of Fraszki by Jan Kochanowski, 1590
Title page of Fraszki by Jan Kochanowski, 1590

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 09:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fraszki; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General eligibility:

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Green tickY
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg QPQ is a currently active review, and therefore, not usable. I am willing to wait till it's wrapped up but would appreciate a ping if you still intend on using it. Page is new enough, meets length requirements, hook is interesting. I am having difficultly accessing where the "obscene" part of this comes from, it is questionably in the article itself and I cannot find it in the sourcing. This may be bordering on WP:PUFFERY but its an admittedly minor point (perhaps adding FN 4 to the sourcing would resolve this). Some clarification would be ideal. Image appears to be in order, no other concerns. Giving a customary @Piotrus:. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 03:23, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Etriusus, Obsene erotica is a combination of the terms obscenities and erotica from the sources quoted in the article. Could change it to "obscenities and erotica" but I don't think the meaning changes. I am a bt unclear about what puffery is there to be removed, and what clarifications are needed, but if you can be more specific, I'll see if anything can be rephrased further. As for QPQ, yes, I'd like to use it, as I intend to finish it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:55, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Piotrus: I changed the hook to "obscenities and erotica", feel free to change back if you disagree. With that change you can disregard my PUFFERY comment. My concern was that 'obscene erotica' is a much more loaded term than just 'erotica' and I was looking for something more concrete in the sourcing (i.e. the exact phrase 'obscene erotic' or something analogous). I understand where my confusion came from, but the slight modification made resolves this. Ping me whenever the QPQ is done and I am fine with passing this. Excellent work as always. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 04:04, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 28[edit]

Torchlight: Infinite

(
)

Created by Nmarshall25 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Torchlight: Infinite; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Article was worked on in draftspace and was moved into mainspace. It is long enough and sourced, although there is a citation needed tag that needs to be addressed. The article appears to be written neutrally and without copyright violation. Nmarshall25 has one DYK credit to their name, so QPQ is not required for this nomination. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Karmalink

(
)

Created by Arcahaeoindris (talk). Self-nominated at 17:40, 28 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Karmalink; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg The article is currently rated as a stub, although in terms of raw character count it passes the DYK checker. I'll look more into this while you expand it to the best of your abilities. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thank you! I called it a stub as I just started it. I have reclassed it as "start-class" now. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yosemite Valley Railroad

(
)
  • ... that the Yosemite Valley Railroad was a popular mode of transportation for Hollywood celebrities visiting Yosemite National Park in the 1920s? Source: Johnston, Hank. Railroads of the Yosemite Valley. Corona Del Mar, California: Trans-Anglo Book. ISBN 0-87046-055-2.
    • ALT1: ... that the Yosemite Valley Railroad opened in 1907, the year after Yosemite was designated as a National Park? Source: FROM MERCED TO EL PORTAL: The Canyon Route to Yosemite. Foley's Yosemite Souvenir & Guide. 1907.
    • Reviewed:

5x expanded by Guywelch2000 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Yosemite Valley Railroad; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size (5x expansion) are fine. Spotcheck did not find a copyvio issues, hooks are interesting. However, the article has a major problem due to insufficient references. Many paragraphs are not referenced, that includes the primary hook about celebrities. (There is a source provided above, but with no page number, and the source needs to be present in the article anyway). I am also not seeing a QPQ review linked (the nom/author has at least one another DYK nom credited on their talk page). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:05, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on March 1[edit]

Birubala Rabha

(
)
Birubala Rabha
Birubala Rabha

5x expanded by Schnitzella (talk) and Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk). Nominated by Schnitzella (talk) at 15:37, 6 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Birubala Rabha; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Do you know whether https://www.lokmattimes.com/topics/mission-birubala/ copied the first 2 sentences without attributing Wikipedia or vice-versa? Oh sorry you won't know as it was before your time - I will try to figure it out. Not on Wayback Machine but I guess they copied us as I cannot see why they would say that Assam is in India as all their readers would know that. Earwig tool shows no other copyvio.
  • Checked no qpq needed, checked long enough and 5x expanded from previous 500 characters. Hook is interesting for me and checked it is in source.
  • Checked picture - seems fine to me
  • Spot checked a couple of cites fine

@Schnitzella: Please could you cite or remove the sentence with the "Citation needed" tag and that will probably be enough for me to approve this interesting article. If you like you can also link persecuted as witches. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Doh forgot to notify writer - did it now Chidgk1 (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Symbol question.svgReply[reply]

Garry Kasparov

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Dallavid (talk) and Billsmith60 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 17:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Garry Kasparov; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment I thought it might be better to use a DYK that wasn't one of Kasparov's records, because those could potentially be surpassed in the future. I had also wanted to write out the full names, "...from the International Chess Federation (FIDE) following a dispute in 1993 and established the rival organisation Professional Chess Association (PCA)..." because the average reader may not be familiar with them, but this would've gone over the character limit. --Dallavid (talk) 00:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I'm not a chess expert, but recognize Kasparov as a great, so most consecutive wins does not seem all the surprising or interesting. The alt hook has potential. However, I don't see where "World Chess Champion from 1985 to 2000" is explicly stated (and sourced) in the article. Also, the hook's "dispute in 1993" is not clear in the text of the WP article, which only seems to mention: "After a confusing and compressed bidding process produced lower financial estimates than expected..." Finally, the article's "Their match took place under the auspices of the Professional Chess Association (PCA), an organisation established by Kasparov" is not supported by the nearest citation. —Bagumba (talk) 09:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As noted on the Kasparov Talk page, those two issues have been addressed. Regards Billsmith60 (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While "(1985 to 2000)" is now in the lead,[23] I don't see it obviously sourced in the body. Perhaps if someone can quote the text from the WP page that supports this span? I'm also still unclear the exact "dispute" that the hook refers to. A quote from the WP page would be helpful there too. Finally, the Britannica source for "Professional Chess Association" (currretly footnote 67), leads to a display of "Page Not Found" from the Britannica site.—Bagumba (talk) 15:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Doesn't the Sun-Sentinel source I provided explain the dispute? Dallavid (talk) 21:37, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1 says ...broke away from FIDE following a dispute in 1993..., but the Sun-Sentinel source talks about the dispute after they broke off and formed the PCA, not before.—Bagumba (talk) 07:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here are some sources for the disputes being before the PCA was founded.[24][25][26] Dallavid (talk) 20:33, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on March 2[edit]

Constantine (son of Theophilos)

(
)
  • ... that Constantine, a Byzantine co-emperor, reportedly died by drowning in a cistern at the Palace of Blachernae after escaping the care of his nurse? Source: Lilie, Ralph-Johannes; Ludwig, Claudia; Pratsch, Thomas; Zielke, Beate (1998–2013). Prosopographie der mittelbyzantinischen Zeit (in German). Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter. , Herrin, Judith (2002) [2001]. Women in Purple: Rulers of Medieval Byzantium. London: Phoenix Press. ISBN 1-84212-529-X. Page 192.

Improved to Good Article status by Unlimitedlead (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 05:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Constantine (son of Theophilos); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Thanks @Onegreatjoke: for nominating this. I will say, however, that the hook would benefit from losing the "Palace of Blachernae" part (for length), and briefly mentioning that Constantine was an infant while all of this occurred. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Onegreatjoke: Have you seen this? Unlimitedlead (talk) 23:32, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1: "... that Constantine, a Byzantine co-emperor, reportedly died by drowning in a cistern as a child after escaping the care of his nurse?" Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I like: ALT2: "... that Constantine, an infant Byzantine emperor, reportedly died by drowning in a cistern after escaping the care of his nurse?" Unlimitedlead (talk) 17:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Omar (opera)

(
)

Created by MelanieN (talk). Self-nominated at 18:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Omar (opera); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

The Discovery of Morniel Mathaway

(
)
  • ... that William Tenn's science fiction short story "The Discovery of Morniel Mathaway", has been used to illustrate Jacques Lacan's concept of the sinthome? Source: Žižek, page 58, and many (many) books that refer to Žižek
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: No idea whether this is too many links or too few

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 17:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Discovery of Morniel Mathaway; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - No.

QPQ: Red XN - Not done.
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Article created on 2 March, and meets the length requirement. Earwig reveals no copyvio and I didn't spot any instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing. QPQ has not been done. I don't think the hook is interesting, since I think most readers will simply go "I don't understand what that means" and move on. Some comments on the content:

  • Plot summaries don't really need references (the work itself is presumed to be the source), but including them is not a problem, either.
  • ISFDB is not a WP:Reliable source.
  • The same script was used for productions on Future Tense in July 1976. – unsourced.
  • Žižek's "masterpiece" work – this is the first mention of Slavoj Žižek in the article, so the full name should be included and linked.
  • Žižek's "masterpiece" work – I don't see a good reason to include "masterpiece" here. Seems like unnecessary WP:PUFFERY.
  • This analysis is widely used in similar works. – unsourced.

Ping Maury Markowitz. TompaDompa (talk) 16:05, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TompaDompa: The template makes it practically impossible to read in source form, so forgive me if I miss anything:

  • The opinion on this changes daily. Not going to do anything here.
  • For a list of books it was published in? Really? Whatever, open to suggestions.
  • Link added.
  • "masterpiece" is used, in this form, in the article on the book. I'm in favour of leaving it in.
  • Removed.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Masterpiece" might be reasonable in the article on the book itself, but I don't see a good reason to include it here. On a similar note, an issue best known for its cover article by Willy Ley describing the Disneyland production of Man in Space which featured the famous reusable winged spaceship designed by Wernher von Braun for the show is WP:OFFTOPIC. TompaDompa (talk) 14:07, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 3[edit]

Garnett Wikoff

(
)
  • ... that delivering newspapers was how Garnett Wikoff became an Olympic runner? Source: Norwalk Evening Herald ("Garnett Wikoff is working his way through college by selling newspapers. He has a route and it is a large one, covering territory of nine or ten miles. This has to be traversed each morning before breakfast and school. It is to this work that Wikoff owes his successes and fame as a long-distance runner and from this work he also earns enough to pay for his education. For two years he has had the route and has carried papers in rain or shine, in heat or cold. Each morning, the young man is up at an hour when most of his school mates are asleep. Daily he began to quicken his pace. First he adopted a brisk walk, then a dog trot, and now he runs at full speed, stopping only to deliver his papers.")

5x expanded by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Garnett Wikoff; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article was expanded at least 5x, is long enough and is neutral. It was nominated for DYK on due time. It cites sources inline. "Earwig's Copyvio Detector" reports text similarity of 40.5% in one source commenting "violation possible". However, the text portions are quotes only, therfore, no copyvio is there. The hook is well-formatted, interesting, and is cited inline. Its length is within limit. QPQ is missing. I will approve after the QPQ was provided. CeeGee 08:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Isaac Musa

(
)

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 17:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Isaac Musa; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Soman: I am far from expert in en grammar but I feel DYK and the sentence in the article too needs bit improvement in paraphrasing. Sentence in the article says ".. Isaac Musa was listed, .., as 'Dead Perpetrators' by the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (LTRC), presented by the Commission as 'perpetrators who the LTRC [determined] were responsible for various forms of human rights abuses [...] and war crimes but died before the conclusion of the LTRC.'
Can sentence in the article be rephrased something like, ".. Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (LTRC) declared Isaac Musa among perpetrators who were responsible for various forms of human rights abuses [...] and war crimes but died before the conclusion of the LTRC. .."
Now about DYK, Can we understand why you are using word 'supposed' in ".. among deceased supposed perpetrators .."? I am feeling that word bit awkwardly placed. I have not checked source. Whether commission is not sure of their war crimes? If LTRC is sure and conclusive then word 'supposed' seems unnecessary. If LTRC is not sure then whether word 'likely' or 'most likely' will be better in place of word supposed?
Your feed back will help Other users to help you better.
I chose to comment in this DYK being participant in User:Boud/Draft:WikiProject Peace.
Bookku (talk) 11:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem is that LTRC wasn't conclusive by any means. Effectively Isaac's name was put on a list, but it's not like he was really placed on trial on anything. So adding 'supposed' to the DYK is a safer wording. --Soman (talk) 18:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tiakur

(
)

Created by Nyanardsan (talk). Self-nominated at 05:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Tiakur; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 4[edit]

Fred Narganes

(
)

5x expanded by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fred Narganes; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on March 5[edit]

2023 Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly

(
)
Vladimir Putin delivering the presidential address in 2023
Vladimir Putin delivering the presidential address in 2023
Vladimir Putin delivering the presidential address
Vladimir Putin delivering the presidential address
Vladimir Putin delivering the presidential address
Vladimir Putin delivering the presidential address

Created by dying (talk). Self-nominated at 22:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Half a Soul, Olivia Atwater

( Review or comment )
( Article history links:
)

Created by Poirot09 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Half a Soul; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg I think there might need to be changes to the hook because, as currently written, it fails WP:DYKSG#C6: If the subject is a work of fiction or a fictional character, the hook must involve the real world in some way. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it okay now? I haven't changed it much since I think the premise of the book is the most interesting part. Poirot09 (talk) 14:14, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've added a possible ALT that clearly refers to the real world in case the first one doesn't meet the requirement. Poirot09 (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can we try a different angle here? I don't think this one is working out. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:47, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For both hooks? Is the issue the wording or the content? I'll see but I feel like those are the most interesting bits. Poirot09 (talk) 10:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There may be disagreement on this, but based on previous precedent, I really don't think the new ALT solves the earlier concern about it not being related to the real world. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:18, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bating (leather)

(
)
  • ... that either dog feces, or hen and pigeon manure, were used by tanners to produce a soft leather? Source: Wood, Joseph Turney (1912). The Puering, Bating, and Drenching of Skins. London: Spon. OCLC 9336160, p. 1
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: This is a newly created article, made on 5 March 2023

Created by Davidbena (talk). Self-nominated at 14:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bating (leather); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment Why spell it "fæces"? What I can find online all says that that's an archaic spelling. Cheers! Freedom4U (talk) 07:44, 7 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - n
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Interesting and original topic, will catch attention, hook citation needs proper location (citation attached to the prime sentence / maybe the cite two sentences on will do but this needs work by someone with access to the sources...) While the material does not raise plagiarism red flags, there is one rather long direct quote - it's properly cited, but still a significant percentage of the total; no other major issues. QPQ not required, as seems to be just second DYK. Will await article tweaks. SeoR (talk) 02:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 6[edit]

Nick Acocella

(
)
  • ... that New Jersey politics expert Nick Acocella hosted Pasta & Politics, a television show where he would make pasta with various politicians including Thomas Kean, Cory Booker, and Chris Christie? Source: “ He hosted a TV show in which he spoke with local political titans like Tom Kean and Chris Christie while cooking pasta.
    In 2015, he started hosting his own TV show, “Pasta & Politics,” on NJTV. He welcomed guests like U.S. Sen. Cory Booker and state Senate President Stephen Sweeney to make Italian food and chat about their trade.
    “I love politics. I love pasta. The combination was inevitable,” Acocella said of the idea.” NJ.com

Created by Thriley (talk). Self-nominated at 23:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Nick Acocella; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Geneva Declaration (1918)

(
)
  • ... that the Geneva Declaration was the agreement on a provisional government during the creation of Yugoslavia? Source: Janković, Dragoslav (1964). "Ženevska konferencija o stvaranju jugoslovenske zajednice 1918. godine" [Geneva Conference on Creation of the Yugoslav Community in 1918]. Istorija XX veka [History of the 20th Century] (in Serbian). Vol. V. Belgrade: Institute of Legal History of the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law. pp. 225–262. OCLC 67000822. Pages 242-244 and 249 amongst other sources
    • ALT1: ... that Nikola Pašić was did not want to compromise on the Geneva Declaration despite insistence and threats until a letter was received detailing Raymond Poincaré wishes to come to an agreement? Source: Janković, Dragoslav (1964). "Ženevska konferencija o stvaranju jugoslovenske zajednice 1918. godine" [Geneva Conference on Creation of the Yugoslav Community in 1918]. Istorija XX veka [History of the 20th Century] (in Serbian). Vol. V. Belgrade: Institute of Legal History of the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law. pp. 225–262. OCLC 67000822. Pages 246-247
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/New Jersey's 1927 biannual elections proposal
    • Comment: Unsure if I worded these correctly or got some incorrect.

Improved to Good Article status by Tomobe03 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 21:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Geneva Declaration (1918); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Charles III of Navarre

(
)

5x expanded by Surtsicna (talk). Self-nominated at 19:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Charles III of Navarre; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - maybe try thinking of more.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Surtsicna: Good article. Though i do wonder if you can think of any other hooks considering these feel pretty basic. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am quite surprised by that remark, Onegreatjoke. I suppose much of the appeal of the hooks is reliant on being able to associate the king's name with his modern namesake, Charles III of the United Kingdom, who might be best known for a mistress-wrecked marriage and who (rather than his sister) is about to be crowned king in England in May. It is why I have even considered suggesting 1 April for the original hook or early May for ALT1. Surtsicna (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. The proposed hooks, especially the first one, are extremely attention-grabbing. One could say they are a little too attention-grabbing... Unlimitedlead (talk) 23:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on March 7[edit]

Mary Shadow

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Jon698 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mary Shadow; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol question.svg Interesting article and hook - ready once QPQ done. Zeromonk (talk) 10:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Caity Baser

(
)

Created by Launchballer (talk) and 03md (talk). Nominated by Launchballer (talk) at 13:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Caity Baser; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hi Launchballer (talk), review follows: article created 2 March and exceeds minimum length; article is cited inline throughout to what look to be reliable sources for the content cited; I didn't spot any overly close paraphrasing in checking the sources; hook fact is interesting enough for me, mentioned in the article and checks out to source cited; just awaiting a QPQ, I think - Dumelow (talk) 14:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kemah Bob

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 12:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kemah Bob; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - n (needs some work)
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg (plagiarism free except of the quote of course! + the check just gives you how many the person did and not how they did vs. How many they nominated!) I enjoyed reading this article. Overall, Well sourced (did not verify all references but checked up to the hook) although an image for the persona would have added more perspective. Nevertheless, Good work! Let's brainstorm some hooks .. I will come back with some hook suggestions as the current one needs some work especially around the word “maintains” FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Launchballer: here some hooks ..

Babel II (short story)

(
)
  • ... that Damon Knight invented a language for his story "Babel II", where the protagonist accidentally triggers a second Tower of Babel? Source: page 104 of the original story and the entry in Conley and Cain
    • Reviewed:

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 00:32, 7 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Babel II (short story); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Maury Markowitz:
    • general: article is new enough and long enough.
    • policy: article is neutral. everything is sourced except for the plot summary, which does not require citations as per mos:plotsource. earwig shows nothing of concern.
    • qpq: not yet provided.
    • hook:
      • i don't have access to the conley and cain source, but the story itself describes a simple substitution cipher, which i wouldn't call an invented language. (the story "partially describes" the language when the protagonist lists which letters he had worked out.) if, for example, i decided to substitute all my a's with e's and vice versa, i don't think i cen cleim to ba writing in e diffarant lenguega. i think it is also a bit unusual to state that knight invented the language. although he may have been the first to use that specific substitution cipher, i believe the general concept has existed for thousands of years.
      • i think adding "event" to the end of the hook, to conform with the description in the plot summary, would prevent the hook from suggesting that another tower of babel was built in the story. i wouldn't consider this modification necessary though; it's just a suggestion.
    • points outside of the dyk criteria:
      • do reliable sources state that the traveller was from a different dimension? this did not seem clear to me from the story.
      • the plot summary is worded to suggest that after the protagonist realizes that this is a repeat of the tower of babel event, he heads first to mexico to meet up with the traveller. however, the story has the protagonist head first to greenwich village. was this part of the story deliberately skipped? if so, i think the phrase "his next stop is in Mexico" could be reworded, for example, by replacing it with "the traveller would be heading to Mexico", to accurately reflect the story without needing to go into details regarding the trip to greenwich village.
      • i don't think the protagonist caught the traveller "entering another building". the traveller exited the world the same way he entered: via the protagonist's drawing table.
Symbol question.svg awaiting qpq. issue with hook. dying (talk) 16:52, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 8[edit]

N. Porsenna

(
)

Created by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 12:02, 16 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/N. Porsenna; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Audrey Whitty

(
)

Created by SeoR (talk). Self-nominated at 21:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Audrey Whitty; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

    • I added alt1. She is also an expert on Albert Bender who gave a huge art collection to Dublin but they never had room to display it - Whitty created the first exhibition. Victuallers (talk) 10:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Many thanks, the article is now leaner and fitter. On Bender, not just that but the subject literally wrote the book on the topic. I have seen that exhibition and it is very well done. I will compose an alt to reflect this aspect too. It would be really nice to progress this nom. during Womens History Month, so I will get on with my QPQ also. SeoR (talk) 12:42, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2015 Shoreham Airshow crash

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Mjroots (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:44, 11 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2015 Shoreham Airshow crash; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment - another angle for a hook is the 7 years it took for the inquest to take place. Mjroots (talk) 16:10, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The article, which was started on the date of the crash, was nominated on 8 March 2023, the date it was approved as a Good Article.
    • I have reviewed the Good Article review, and all seems to be in order.
    • Both hooks are accurate and are supported by various reliable sources.
    • Good-quality sources are used throughout. The quality of the prose is also good.
    • Unfortunately, the article was featured in the prose section of the "On this day" section of the Main Page on 22 August 2022 (link), which makes it ineligible for DYK on the face of it (based on DYK criterion 1c). A shame, as this is clearly a high-quality and important article which would benefit from appearing again on the Main Page, especially since significant further developments have happened since August 2022 in relation to the inquest. I wonder if we could invoke WP:IAR in view of this...?

Symbol question.svg Let's get some more thoughts on this from experienced DYK personnel. I would be happy to support the article appearing on DYK despite its appearance at "On This Day" within the last year, in view of the updates which have happened since then. In its present state the article and both hooks are suitable for DYK except for this issue. Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 22:11, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Censorship under the military dictatorship in Brazil

(
)

Created by إيان (talk). Self-nominated at 19:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Censorship under the military dictatorship in Brazil; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Shall we link O Estado de S. Paulo? Just a suggestion. Maybe mentioning the kilogram of salt would be good too. Bremps! 05:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bremps, sure—whatever people think is best. I just found the kg of salt detail in the Vice source and wasn't able to cross-check it though. إيان (talk) 01:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 9[edit]

Passions (Homilius)

(
)
Homilius in 1782
Homilius in 1782
  • ... that the St Matthew Passion, composed by G. A. Homilius (pictured) in two parts of 50 movements, was first recorded in 1993, and performed in 2023, although it is not yet published? Source: several
    • Reviewed: to come
    • Comment: The article is about four Passions, and more details will follow I hope. For Good Friday, 7 April, please. Help wanted for perhaps include that both recording and performance were with the same bass soloist which made the performance possible. --

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 12:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Passions (Homilius); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 10[edit]

Hummingbird

(
)
A hummingbird
A hummingbird

Improved to Good Article status by Zefr (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:06, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hummingbird; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Rachel Belden Brooks

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Bridges2Information (talk). Nominated by Paul2520 (talk) at 15:17, 14 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Rachel Belden Brooks; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Nestor Binabo

(
)
  • ... that Nestor Binabo has been robbed, assaulted, and had his son and wife kidnapped, all on separate occasions? Source:
    Robbed:
    "Robbers invade Bayelsa Assembly". Vanguard. 17 September 2011.
    Assaulted:
    "Bayelsa acting speaker escapes mob attack". Oyibos OnLine. 25 May 2008. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
    "Ex-Bayelsa acting gov injured, as assassins storm residence". Punch Newspapers. 9 August 2017. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
    Son Kidnapped:
    James, Segun (29 March 2008). "Nigeria: Kidnapped Son of Bayelsa Deputy Speaker Escapes". allAfrica. Retrieved 10 March 2022.
    Wife Kidnapped:
    Eziukwu, Arodiegwu (6 July 2015). "Kidnapped wife of ex-Bayelsa governor freed". Premium Times. Retrieved 10 March 2023.
    • ALT1: ... that when Nestor Binabo's wife was freed by her kidnappers, she was given a bag of fish and told to make her husband peppersoup? Source: Oyadongha, Samuel (6 July 2015). "Kidnappers release former Bayelsa Speaker's wife, give her N18,000, bag of fish". Vanguard.
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the most unlucky man alive.

5X expanded by Bremps (talk). Self-nominated at 22:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Nestor Binabo; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


I think I still have a freebie or two left? Bremps! 22:54, 10 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Current nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on March 11[edit]

Paul Lill

(
)
Paul Lill
Paul Lill
  • ... that Estonian Minister of War Paul Lill (pictured) resigned in 1939, citing unacceptable conditions of the Bases Treaty with Soviet Union? Source: "Sellele arvamusele jäi ta kindlaks ka 1939. aasta sügisel, kui ta pärast baaside lepingu sõlmimist pidas selle tingimusi vastuvõetamatuteks ja palus end sõjaministri kohalt vabastada. Ta läks kindralleitnandina erru." English: "He remained at this opinion in Autumn 1939, when after signing of the bases treaty he considered its conditions unacceptable, and requested to be relieved from the post of Minister of War. He retired as lieutenant general." [29]

5x expanded by Staberinde (talk). Self-nominated at 21:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Paul Lill; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Drew Van Horn, Georgia Nonpublic Postsecondary Education Commission

( Review or comment )

Created by Mgreason (talk). Self-nominated at 16:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Drew Van Horn; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on March 12[edit]

Soviet submarine K-222

(
)
Soviet submarine K-222
Soviet submarine K-222
  • ... that Soviet submarine K-222 was the first submarine built with a titanium hull? Source: Polmar, Norman & Moore, Kenneth J. (2004). Cold War Submarines: The Design and Construction of U.S. and Soviet Submarines. Washington, D. C.: Potomac Books. ISBN 978-1-57488-594-1. Page 139
    • ALT1: ... that Soviet submarine K-222 was the fastest submarine ever built? Source: same as above
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Getting Older
    • Comment: Some problems. 1. alt1 kind of has an unsureness is completely correct. A google search shows me that it's the fastest but also not but also is. Personally I think alt1 is correct but It's weird. Though the main problem is that none of these hooks are in the main article but rather in the lead. If nobody puts them in the article then I'll have to add it myself.

Improved to Good Article status by Sturmvogel 66 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 01:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Soviet submarine K-222; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 13[edit]

Otto Schwarz (bandleader)

(
)
Otto Schwarz
Otto Schwarz
  • ... that "greatly respected" travelling bandleader Otto Schwarz (pictured) and his Bavarian String Band were interned in Douglas, Isle of Man, during World War I? Source: Malcolm G. Neesam (2022) Wells & Swells, the golden age of Harrogate Spa, 1842–1923, Carnegie Publishing, Lancaster, England, pages 1024–1025. (Paraphrase: Schwarz continued to perform in Harrogate up to 4 August 1914 when the First World War was announced. On 5 August, Schwarz and his band walked to Harrogate Police station with luggage and instruments, and queued, as per government requirement, to be interned as enemy aliens. They were imprisoned, then transported to Douglas in the Isle of Man)

Created by Storye book (talk). Self-nominated at 17:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Otto Schwarz (bandleader); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Thomas Charles Sorby, Grove Road Cemetery, Harrogate, Robert Ackrill, Fridel Meyer, George Dawson (1821-1889), Richard Ellis (mayor of Harrogate), David Simpson (mayor of Harrogate), John Smith (banker), John Turner (miser), Daniel Schwarz (bandleader)

( Review or comment )
Former chapels, Grove Road Cemetery
Former chapels, Grove Road Cemetery
Source: GROVE ROAD CEMETERY and SORBY: Builder: "Sorby, Thomas Charles ... HARROGATE, new cemetery with lodge and two new chapels, 1862-64"

ACKRILL: "Harrogate. Interment of Mr Robert Ackrill". York Herald. 26 June 1894. p. 3 cols 3,4: "[In Harrogate, the funeral procession ... proceeded ... by way of Walker Road to The Cemetery" (This would take the procession to Harrogate Cemetery, now known as Grove Road Cemetery, where his grave monument stands today.)]

MEYER: Stray Ferret: "Grove Road Cemetery has Fridel Dalling-Hay (aka Fridel Meyer).

DAWSON: "Harrogate: funeral of Alderman Dawson". York Herald. 1 March 1889. p.3 col.1.: "The funeral of Alderman Dawson ... took place at the Harrogate Cemetery (aka Grove Road Cemetery)

ELLIS: Neesam, Malcolm G. (2022). Wells & Swells, the golden age of Harrogate Spa, 1842-1923 p.635: "Ellis was laid to rest at Grove Road Cemetery, in a plot next to that of George Dawson".

SIMPSON: Thomas Charles SorbyThomas Charles Sorby "Deaths, Simpson". Leeds Mercury. 17 January 1931. p. 4 col.1."David Simpson J.P. ... interment at Grove Road Cemetery".

SMITH: "The late Mr John Smith". Leeds Mercury. British Newspaper Archive. 28 September 1866. p. 3 col.2. Interred at Harrogate Cemetery (now called Grove Road Cemetery). In case that isn't enough, Smith has one of the biggest grave monuments in the cemetery (pictured in article), with his name engraved deeply on the front: "John Smith of Burley House" as he was known.

TURNER: "Funeral of the late Mr John Turner". Leeds Mercury. 9 March 1883. p. 5 col.4. Turner died and was interred at Harrogate, and today his grave monument still stands in Grove Road Cemetery.

DANIEL SCHWARTZ:

"Death of the leader of the Schwarz Band". Knaresborough Post. British Newspaper Archive. 14 March 1885. p. 4 cols 2-3. Daniel Schwartz ... was buried at Harrogate Cemetery" (aka Grove Road Cemetery).

5x expanded by Storye book (talk). Self-nominated at 16:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Thomas Charles Sorby; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Linguistic Atlas of the Iberian Peninsula

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Erinius (talk). Self-nominated at 17:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Linguistic Atlas of the Iberian Peninsula; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • ALT1: ... that the linguist Aníbal Otero was imprisoned for espionage while working on fieldwork for the Linguistic Atlas of the Iberian Peninsula? Source: "On the strength of ‘evidence’ that he was a spy — his avowed sympathy for the Republican cause, the fact that his ALPI fieldwork was funded by the Republican government in Madrid, and especially those suspicious notebooks he had with him, which were apparently full of incomprehensible writing in ‘code’ — a summary military tribunal convicted Otero of high treason and sentenced him to death by firing squad... his death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment. He was eventually pardoned and released in 1941 (two years after the end of the Civil War), having spent more than five years in prison for the crime of linguistic fieldwork and Republican sympathies " https://twpl.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/twpl/article/view/6165

Articles created/expanded on March 14[edit]

Killer toy

(
)
Otto (right) in The Great Gabbo
Otto (right) in The Great Gabbo

Created by Thebiguglyalien (talk). Nominated by BorgQueen (talk) at 21:08, 16 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Killer toy; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Foster Loyer

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 03:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Foster Loyer; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on March 15[edit]

Old Bazaar, Prilep

(
)

Created by Local hero (talk). Self-nominated at 16:18, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Old Bazaar, Prilep; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Barely long enough and new enough. I don't see 1825 or The date of its construction signifies the time around when the commercial centre of Prilep shifted from the Varoš area below Marko's Towers to the plain further below through which the Prilep River passes. in the given sources. Need to AGF on some of the other sources. Some of them also need a format cleanup. Randomly Googling some sentences finds no plagiarism or copyvio. Hook is moderately interesting and seems to be supported by several sources. The other linked articles don't seem to be too bad. QPQ and images are fine. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: "In the course of the 15th century the town of Prilep shifted from its old site on the hill below the castle to the plain below where the main road passed... The new site was better situated for the development of a commercial and trading centre than the old place which declined slowly... known as Prilip - Varos. The new town is about three km south, built on both sides of a small river. An important date for the transfer of Prilep to the new site is that on the inscription of the Carsi Camii which gives 881 (1476/77). The new places witnessed a slow development in the 16th and 17 centuries..." found on page 167 of Some Little-Known Monuments of Ottoman Turkish Architecture in the Macedonian Province. Removed 1825 as I cannot find it in the sources, must've gotten it from the MK version. Thanks. --Local hero talk 15:50, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Might want to rewrite the sentence a bit - as it stands it's a bit too similar to the source. Also, some reference errors need to be fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:07, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: fixed the ref errors. Also, tweaked that paraphrasing a bit. Thanks. --Local hero talk 18:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Obviously 5 Believers

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by BennyOnTheLoose (talk). Self-nominated at 10:51, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Obviously 5 Believers; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - n
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @BennyOnTheLoose: Good article. Though, the hooks kind of feel a bit bland. The only one that really interests me is Alt2 but i'm not all too confident about it. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How about a version of one of these, Onegreatjoke? (I think there's something in ALT3, but it might need tweaking.)

  • ALT3: ... that in 1966 one of the Hawks (later known as the Band) played on "Obviously 5 Believers", which was later the name of a band (later known as the Hawks) who played on Obviously 5 Believers (2021)? Sources: Heylin, Clinton (2021). Heylin, Clinton (2021). The Double Life of Bob Dylan. Vol. 1 1941-1966, A restless, hungry feeling pp. 388–392.; Seaman, Duncan (August 26, 2021); "Stephen Duffy and David Twist on The Hawks: 'We weren't after world domination'". The Yorkshire Post.
  • ALT4: ... that "Obviously 5 Believers" by Bob Dylan inspired the name of a band featuring Duran Duran founding member Stephen Duffy? Sources: Petridis, Alexis (October 15, 2004). "Radio daze". The Guardian.; Seaman, Duncan (August 26, 2021); "Stephen Duffy and David Twist on The Hawks: 'We weren't after world domination'". The Yorkshire Post.
@BennyOnTheLoose: Alt3 could work but I do agree that a rewording is needed. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:27, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Order of the Two Niles

(
)

Created by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 10:58, 15 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Order of the Two Niles; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Definitely new enough (13 Mar) and long enough in prose. It also adheres to policy and proper formatting, with many references (several are foreign-language). The hook is under 200 characters and is interesting. I might suggest (White and Blue) in parentheses instead of following a comma, but it's fine this way too. Nominator completed a QPQ. Best. --Local hero talk 16:17, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg @FuzzyMagma and Local hero: Possible Emojione 1F60F.svg This might make a good quirky hook.(?). However, the hook is not in the article. Nothing about Order of the Nile, or Egypt. See D2 Bruxton (talk) 19:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: saying the last part (... that Sudan has the Order of the Two Niles, White and Blue?) alone is not catchy enough. ALT1 (in the same vein): ... that Zewail received the Order of the Nile and the Order of the Two Niles, White and Blue?, it may work but I don’t think it’s interesting enough .. would the quirkiness suffice? FuzzyMagma (talk) 08:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Propose them in a format ideally with a source, but the first thing is make sure whatever hook you propose is in the article with a citation following it.
Bruxton (talk) 13:55, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 16[edit]

Dave Kufeld

(
)

Created by Longhornsg (talk). Self-nominated at 18:23, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Dave Kufeld; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Bloody Mary (song)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Sricsi (talk). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bloody Mary (song); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Monument to the Victims of the Holocaust

(
)

Created by Longhornsg (talk). Self-nominated at 15:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Monument to the Victims of the Holocaust; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

TRAPPIST-1

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 09:39, 16 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/TRAPPIST-1; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - ?
  • Interesting: Red XN - ?

QPQ: Question?
Overall: Symbol question.svg Valereee (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Not finding the term "harmonic chain" in the article. Valereee (talk) 18:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't know what a harmonic chain is, which I think affects interestingness of the hook. Maybe a link? Valereee (talk) 18:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • QPQ started; I can AGF on finishing it once we finish up here. Valereee (talk) 18:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 17[edit]

La Voce della Patria

(
)

Created by Soman (talk). Self-nominated at 00:08, 18 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/La Voce della Patria; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Claire von Greyerz

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Kusma (talk). Self-nominated at 00:02, 18 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Claire von Greyerz; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Pubs in Brighton

(
)

Created by Hassocks5489 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:45, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Pubs in Brighton; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Marie-Julien Dunand

(
)

Created by TheLonelyPather (talk). Self-nominated at 21:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Marie-Julien Dunand; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Lewes Road, Brighton

(
)
  • ... that Lewes Road in Brighton has a gyratory named after a pornographic cinema? Source: Carder (1990) Section 87 part d (current reference [45]). Offline source. "The junction of Lewes, Bear, Hollingdean and Upper Lewes Roads is known as the Vogue Gyratory system after the former Vogue Cinema ... it became a pornographic film club with regular strip-tease acts..."

Created by Hassocks5489 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lewes Road, Brighton; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Marie Meyer (aviator)

(
)
Marie Meyer looping the loop, 1925
Marie Meyer looping the loop, 1925

Created by Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk). Self-nominated at 15:35, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Marie Meyer (aviator); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

1866 Helston by-election

(
)
  • ... that at the 1866 Helston by-election, the two candidates received the same number of votes? Source: "Close of the Poll: Campbell ... 153, Brett ... 153." ("Helston election: The polling". The West Briton & Cornwall Advertiser. Truro, Cornwall. 4 May 1866. p. 4 – via Newspapers.com.)
    • Reviewed:

5x expanded by Harrias (talk). Self-nominated at 14:24, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/1866 Helston by-election; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Harrias: Good article. Waiting on QPQ. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:04, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Ansonia

(
)
The Ansonia
The Ansonia

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 13:54, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Ansonia; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Red XN - Not done
Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @Epicgenius: Good article. Waiting on a QPQ. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:42, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pizza dolce di Beridde

(
)
Pizza dolce di Beridde, a Roman Jewish sweet bread
Pizza dolce di Beridde, a Roman Jewish sweet bread
  • ... that the pizza dolce di Beridde (pictured) is given to the participants of the circumcision feast of a Roman Jewish child? Source: "Durante la festa, si dona ai partecipanti un sacchetto di dolci...Il sacchetto contiene vari dolci tra cui la pizza" [33]
    • ALT1: ... that the pizza dolce di Beridde (pictured) was the favorite dessert of Pope Benedict XVI? Source: " Pope Benedict XVI... surprised the Limentanis two years ago with a thank-you note for his favorite dessert." [34]
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I will review an article ASAP

Created by Alessandro57 (talk). Self-nominated at 09:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Pizza dolce di Beridde; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 18[edit]

Tina Brower-Thomas

(
)
Brower-Thomas in 2019
Brower-Thomas in 2019
  • ... that Center for Integrated Quantum Materials researcher Tina Brower-Thomas's earliest endeavors in chemistry as a child led to her concoctions eating holes in her coat? Source: [35], 3:35–4:10

Moved to mainspace by John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk). Self-nominated at 03:51, 18 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Tina Brower-Thomas; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Roman Josi

(
)
Josi in 2017
Josi in 2017

5x expanded by HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:55, 18 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Roman Josi; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]



Special occasion holding area[edit]

The holding area is near the top of the Approved page. Please only place approved templates there; do not place them below.

Do not nominate articles in this section—nominate all articles in the nominations section above, under the date on which the article was created or moved to mainspace, or the expansion began; indicate in the nomination any request for a specially timed appearance on the main page.
Note: Articles intended to be held for special occasion dates should be nominated within seven days of creation, start of expansion, or promotion to Good Article status. The nomination should be made at least one week prior to the occasion date, to allow time for reviews and promotions through the prep and queue sets, but not more than six weeks in advance. The proposed occasion must be deemed sufficiently special by reviewers. The timeline limitations, including the six week maximum, may be waived by consensus, if a request is made at WT:DYK, but requests are not always successful. Discussion clarifying the hold criteria can be found here: [36]; discussion setting the six week limit can be found here: [37].
April Fools' Day hooks are exempted from the timeline limit; see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know&oldid=1145269499"