Template talk:Did you know

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

There are currently 4 filled queues. Admins, please consider promoting a prep to queue if you have the time!

Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main Page
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}
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 1 1 1
December 7 1 1
December 11 2 1
December 15 1
December 18 1
December 22 1
December 24 1
December 25 2 1
December 26 3 1
December 27 1 1
December 29 2
December 30 1
December 31 3 1
January 1 2
January 2 2
January 3 1 1
January 6 1
January 7 2
January 8 1 1
January 9 4 3
January 10 3 1
January 11 2 1
January 12 4
January 13 4 1
January 14 3 1
January 15 3 1
January 16 2 1
January 17 1 1
January 18 1 1
January 19 3 3
January 20 4 2
January 21 2
January 22 3 1
January 23 6 3
January 24 2
January 25 5 3
January 26 9 4
January 27 7 2
January 28 4 1
January 29 5 2
January 30 5 4
January 31 7 4
February 1 5 4
February 2 5 3
February 3 12 6
February 4 5 3
February 5 13 7
February 6 11 3
February 7 9 5
February 8 8 2
February 9 13 3
February 10 11 4
February 11 11 7
February 12 9 1
February 13 7 5
February 14 9 3
February 15 4 2
February 16 3
February 17 7 1
February 18 2
Total 262 108
Last updated 05:44, 18 February 2024 UTC
Current time is 06:38, 18 February 2024 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

Shortcut

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing. Further information can be found at the supplementary guidelines.

Click here to 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: .
  2. Check to make sure basic review requirements were completed.
    • Any outstanding issue following 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 11[edit]

Ingush towers

(
)
Pyaling tower complex in Ingushetia
Pyaling tower complex in Ingushetia
  • ... that Ingushetia is often called “the country of towers" after the Ingush towers, unique medieval monuments found throughout the region? Source: In the Middle Ages, a period of revival of the tower culture of the North Caucasus began, the phenomenon of which, according to researchers, mostly manifested in the mountains of Ingushetia, which was labeled by many as “the country of towers", to the extent that in 2022 the region's tourism committee announced that the Federal Service for Intellectual Property (Russia) patented the slogan "Ingushetia — Country of Towers". link: https://gazetaingush.ru/news/komitet-po-turizmu-regiona-poluchil-patent-na-ispolzovanie-slogana-ingushetiya-rodina-bashen
    • Reviewed:

Created by Muqale (talk). Self-nominated at 06:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ingush towers; 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: Very good first article, thank you. No need for QPQ, article long enough, cited, picture freely licensed, passes earwig, all good to go. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:16, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This hook was pulled from the Queue. The text from WT:DYK has been copy-pasted below. When this is resolved, this can be reapproved. Z1720 (talk) 16:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is uncited prose in the article, which I have marked with a cn tag. I also think the block quote at the end of the "Towers with pyramidal roofs" section is too long and opens Wikipedia up to copyright concerns. This should be summarised in the article instead. Z1720 (talk) 18:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are more issues. The quote about the "land of towers" translates as "birthplace of towers" for me. Also, this looks like an unattributed translation from ruwiki. —Kusma (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello Kusma, the Russian word "родина" translates as "homeland". As a proficient Russian and English speaker, I didn't feel that "homeland of towers" was a good way to translate the slogan, so I shortened it to "land of towers". But if you feel that "homeland of towers" is more accurate, I have no issues with keeping your suggestion. Muqale⠀ོ 18:24, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Muqale, I think the source with "родина башен" is not sufficient for the "country of towers" claim in the hook. Speaking of sources, I just checked Dolgieva et al. p 136 ([1]), and could not see any mention of Ingushetia as "country of towers". Could you give a more explicit source that confirms "country of towers" or "land of towers" instead of "homeland of towers"? —Kusma (talk) 20:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Muqale: Please respond to the above. Z1720 (talk) 16:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note: the following was posted by Muqale directly on Talk:Ingush towers rather than posted to this template; I have moved the below comments from there to here, adjusted the indentation to fit, and am pinging Kusma, who this is a response to: BlueMoonset (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
1. The statement in the article has a reference to the state newspaper of the Republic of Ingushetia in which the tourism committee announced the patent approval for the slogan. See here
2. Two other references to books are alse linked to this statement in the article:
a) Basilov, Vladimir; Kobychev, Veniamin (1971). "Галгай — страна башен" [Galgai: country of towers] (PDF). Советская этнография (in Russian). Moscow: Nauka (3): 120–135. (p.s.: Ghalghai is the self-name of the Ingush people)
b) Tarakanova, Marina (2023). Самые лучшие места России и мира 4D [The best places in Russia and the world 4D] (in Russian). Nalchik: Mezhizdat. pp. 50–51. ISBN 978-5-17-152205-6. (see first paragraph on page 51) --Muqale 02:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Kusma please advise if the above solves the issues. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AirshipJungleman29, these citations are enough for the "land of towers". I don't have time to look at the article thoroughly right now, please continue any re-review without me. —Kusma (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 15[edit]

John A. Hilger (second nomination)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Toadboy123 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:33, 15 December 2023‎ (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/John A. Hilger (second nomination); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

@Toadboy123: It has been almost a year since this article was withdrawn here at DYK and I see much work has been done to make corrections. A few issues: should we repeat the claim "was commissioned in the U.S. Army Air Corps in 1934" in the body? It is a minor thing that can be corrected on the fly. We also say in the lead he was "selected by Doolittle" but the article only says "Hilger, now a lieutenant colonel, was designated as the deputy commander for the "Doolittle Raid," a mission led by Lieutenant Colonel Jimmy Doolittle in March 1942". Right now both claims are in the lead but not repeated in the body. Also we say "he piloted one of the B-25s that bombed Nagoya in Japan" but the Doolittle section of the article does not say that he was flying a B-25.
Earwig alerts only to long professional titles. I spot checked several references and the citations were correctly used. The QPQ is done and the article was a new GA so it qualifies for DYK. The hook may require a person to have specialized knowledge. Like what is the Doolittle raid? What era? What war? What country? The hook is cited but I think we should explore another based on DYKCRIT

Hooks should be likely to be perceived as unusual or intriguing by readers with no special knowledge or interest.

I am comfortable that the article is free of obvious plagiarism and clop. The article is neutral and no image is offered here but certainly could be. We say he "bail out over the city of Shangrao", maybe it is assumed but we should probably add how he bailed with a parachute. Suggestion.
@Toadboy123: It does not interest me. A bit too busy. Also see if you can address my other nitpicks. Bruxton (talk) 00:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: Ok, I will go for ALT2 as it seems more interesting. - Toadboy123 (talk) 01:05, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Toadboy123: I am hoping to pass the nomination, but I mentioned items that need fixing. Bruxton (talk) 02:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Toadboy123: malformed ping Bruxton (talk) 15:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: I have made stated edits. - Toadboy123 (talk) 03:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Toadboy123: Not yet, two still unfinished items from my initial review Bruxton (talk) 04:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: Did some of your edit requests. Please let me know if there is anything more to be resolved. - Toadboy123 (talk) 06:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have it called out in my first review above.
"was commissioned in the U.S. Army Air Corps in 1934" is not in the body
"selected by Doolittle" is not in the body
Bruxton (talk) 06:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton I have fixed these issues. Let me know now if the article is good to go. - Toadboy123 (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bruxton (talk) 01:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New reviewer needed as ALT2 was created by the reviewer. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Planes of the Doolittle Raid weren't supposed to return - they were supposed to fly on to China, so ALT2 is kind of misleading. One could perhaps go with something like:
I like your hooks but now we need more reviewers. Bruxton (talk) 01:40, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes Bruxton I know that, but proposing alt hooks at times is part of the reviewing process. One cannot promote a nomination unless it has a viable hook. Gatoclass (talk) 03:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bruxton, unless there's a new rule I'm not aware of I think you're allowed to approve Gatoclass's hooks. Both need an end-of-sentence citation in the article though. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Renumbering Gatoclass's two alts as ALT4 and ALT5, since an ALT3 had previously been proposed back on 24 January (which I have just struck per Bruxton's comment that followed). BlueMoonset (talk) 19:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reviewer needed for ALTs 4 and 5. Gatoclass (talk) 00:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Both hooks would require an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 17:52, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
AlT4 isn't even in the article. I mean, if you squint your eyes and read between the lines, then sure, but hooks need to be explicit. Could the nominator add it to the "Doolittle Raid" section in the bio please? Viriditas (talk) 07:14, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT5 is in the article, but lacks a citation at the end of the sentence. Strangely, there is nothing about the hook in Doolittle Raid itself. Viriditas (talk) 07:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note, I attempted to add sources for both ALT4 and ALT5 and could not do so. One of the sources required a subscription to Project Muse, so if you have access to that, please take a look. Viriditas (talk) 08:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on December 18[edit]

Hardpoint (missile defense)

(
)
A HiBEX test shot.
A HiBEX test shot.
  • ... that as part of the Hardpoint missile defense system, ARPA developed missiles able to hit 400 g of acceleration and reaction times in milliseconds? Source: Reed
  • ALT 1... that as part of the Hardpoint missile defense system, ARPA developed missiles able to hit almost 400 g of acceleration and reaction times in milliseconds? Source: Reed p3.1
    • Reviewed:

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 22:23, 18 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hardpoint (missile defense); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Maury Markowitz: I'm really struggling with this DYK. There seems to be a huge amount of cross over with the subject discussed at Sprint_(missile) to the point where I'm wondering if this article is superfluous? and other than HAPDAR I'm struggling to confirm in any of the sources provided that confirms the name of the system as Hardpoint. Wondering if you might be able to provide any guidance? Seddon talk 03:36, 22 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Seddon: I can't speak to the Sprint article, I'm not a primary author there. Given this was a completely different project, run by a different organization, built by different companies, with NOTE easily met, I'm not sure there's an issue to correct in this article. The Sprint article also talks about Thunderbird for some reason... the issue would appear to be on that side.
About the second part. If you mean "does the H in HAPDAR mean Hardpoint", then I would point to the IEEE article whose title is "Hardpoint Demonstration Array Radar" and there's any number of independent verifications like this one at MIT. But you mean "I can't verify this thing is called Hardpoint, I only see that in the title of the radar", then there are any number of independent works that verify it to one degree or another, including this one in Daedalus or this mention in the DOD annual report index. It is worth noting that ARPA referred to it both as "hard point" and "hardpoint" in the documents I've found (all linked within), both as the development effort and the overall concept, so it can be very confusing. It's a bit of the "Kleenex" problem.
@Maury Markowitz: hugely appreciate your response. Good enough for me. Will review later today. Seddon talk 15:59, 22 December 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 eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: mostly just some comments about the image but we could skip on the image and needs a QPQ. Article could do with a quick copy edit. This was a reasonable number and dependaent are examples I found. Approved. All looks good! I cannot formally approve now since I'm proposing ALT1 to fix the issues raised by @AirshipJungleman29: to wrap this up. Seddon talk 14:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Sorry for my tardy reply @Seddon:, xmas time is busy! Excellent review. As to the image, my only concern with the one you suggest is that it is "busy", it's in the foreground but there's so much else going on. I think the solution might be to have someone "grey out" (or "white out" is more accurate) the rest of the image so that the missile stands out more. Let me ask over on the commons. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Z1720: Sorry, this also dropped off my radar. The image was (slightly) updated so the one suggested above could be used. QPQ is Thomas J. Wright (American scholar) Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Seddon: Is this ready to be approved? If not, what needs to be done? Z1720 (talk) 15:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Maury Markowitz:, I am unable to find the "able to hit 400g of acceleration" in the source. Is it derived from the "reached an axial acceleration of about 362g's and about 60g's lateral acceleration" on page 3-8? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29: The previous page lists 377 g. The work "almost" has been removed at some point. Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Maury Markowitz: I see "377 g" on page 3-7. Doesn't that mean that the currently proposed hook is not verified by this source? Rjjiii (talk) 23:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maury Markowitz have you seen the above issue? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Are we entertaining the possibility of changes to the hook to correct this? Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, but the hook needs to match the article, which needs to match the sources. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29: I think this is all fixed here. Seddon talk 12:47, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 22[edit]

James Townsend (abolitionist)

(
)
  • ... that the grandson of abolitionist James Townsend was the first United States man to complete teacher training under the tutelage of Maria Montessori? Source: McGroarty, John Steven (1921). Los Angeles from the Mountains to the Sea. American Historical Society. p. 503.

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 00:34, 22 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/James Townsend (abolitionist); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Given that no one else has reviewed this, I am taking the initiative to review this. The article is new enough and the nomination was done on the day the article was created. A QPQ has been found and no close paraphrasing was found.
However, I am not happy with the state of the article. It is very incomplete regarding Townsend's life. For one thing, no reference or context is given for his year of birth as well as his date of death. The date of death is only mentioned in the lead but it is not elaborated on in the article. Indeed, nothing about his life between the Panic of 1837 and his death is explained at all in the article. In addition, about half of the article if not over half of it is actually about his family and descendants, rather than about Townsend himself. Considering that the article is supposed to be about Townsend and much of the article is not about him, I do not think the article as it stands passes WP:DYKCOMPLETE.
Finally, as mentioned above, the hook above is not about Townsend himself but one of his descendants. A hook that is only indirectly about the subject is not ideal. The way I see it, I can see two potential paths forward for this nomination to pass: either the article is expanded with more information about Townsend, perhaps also including information that could be used as a hook, or the article could be renamed and its focus be changed to be more about the Townsend family rather than James Townsend himself. If these issues are not addressed then unfortunately the nomination may have to be failed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, but the article is still missing a lot about his later life including information about his death. The sourcing issue for the dates of birth and death also remain unaddressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry! I thought I'd added the DOB and DOD refs but it looks like they were caught in draft state. They're now added to the infobox. What information would you like me to add about his later life and death? Chetsford (talk) 04:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Anything you can find about his later life. Right now the article seems incomplete. Narutolovehinata5 (talk ·contributions) 04:23, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I solemnly avow that everything discoverable in RS is included in the article, to the best of my ability. Chetsford (talk) 04:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If that's the case, then perhaps just include his death in the prose, with a reference. Still, I'm really not sure if it's a good idea that about half of the article is about his descendants rather than him himself. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, that's done. I mean I guess I could delete the section about his descendants and the article would still be over the requisite character count. Chetsford (talk) 04:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That wouldn't be necessary, the important think is that the part about his descendants shouldn't be half or over half the length of the article. This can be solved by beefing up the part about James. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, that would definitely be great. Chetsford (talk) 07:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi Narutolovehinata5 - as per above, there is nothing with which to expand, unfortunately. The article, in current form, constitutes the entire universe of information on this person. Chetsford (talk) 05:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Noted. Given that most of the article is about Townsend's relatives and not he himself, unfortunately I still feel that the article is not suitable for DYK given the weight given to the parts not about him, as well as the WP:DYKCOMPLETE concerns. With this in mind, I am marking the nomination for closure as unsuccessful.
However, I will not oppose if a different editor disagrees with me and says the article can run under its current state; if this is to be done, for the reasons stated above, only ALT1 is in consideration for review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, Narutolovehinata5. While I appreciate the review, I don't believe the insatiability of one's curiosity on undocumented aspects of a subject is grounds for rejection of a DYK under WP:DYKCOMPLETE provided all other criteria are met, which appears to be the case here. DYKCOMPLETE presents that all significant, available information about a subject be included in the article, and does not require us to include information about which no source exists. The fact, for instance, that we don't know the date of birth of Abu Bakr is probably not a reasonable basis to reject it under DYKCOMPLETE. That said, I appreciate your amenability to a second review. Chetsford (talk) 00:05, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chetsford: It really isn't the lack of completeness here, it's more that I'm unhappy that most of the article is not actually about Townsend himself. Maybe WP:DYKCOMPLETE wasn't the best guideline to cite, I only mentioned it because the part about Townsend is actually very short and if the part not about him was split off/removed the article would not meet DYK's criteria. I'm not comfortable approving an article about a subject where over half of the article isn't about the subject himself, which is the reason why I'd rather reject this unfortunately. Narutolovehinata5 (talk ·contributions) 00:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, I understand. This is all voluntary and I don't expect you to approve anything you feel uncomfortable approving. Chetsford (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Per a discussion at WT:DYK, the article has been restructured with the other parts not about Townsend being moved to a different article. As such, the article is ready for a fresh look. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Comment: The Lehman source attributes the evils of slavery quote to his grandson, but the way it's presented in the article makes it look like a direct quote. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on December 24[edit]

Medicalisation of sexuality

(
)

Created by Darcyisverycute (talk). Nominated by Mach61 (talk) at 06:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Medicalisation of sexuality; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Darcyisverycute: New enough and long enough. Nominator is QPQ-exempt. The hook fact is in article and checks out to quote. Three passages are uncited and need citations to continue this nomination:
    • Because of this broad definition of sexual health, it has been argued to include an optimistic attitude towards sexual relationships and sexuality, and human rights issues such as "the capability to have pleasant and safer sexual practices that are free of violence, coercion, and discrimination".
    • The economic success of Viagra motivated a number of similar product trials and also prompted research into female sexual pharmacotherapy.
    • Blanchard's theories were influential on the development of the DSM-3, DSM-4 and DSM-5.
While it will be hard to do so, there are a few passages (not including some long terms of art and banal phrases) that are just a little too similar to Hectors [2]. The nominator might want to look and see if anything needs changing. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 20:03, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sammi Brie: I've resolved all the CN tags. Is any possible paraphrasing a dealbreaker? Mach61 (talk) 05:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sammi Brie: Is this hook approved? If not, what needs to be done to get it approved? Z1720 (talk) 17:46, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry for missing these pings. The CN fixes are fine. The hook is fine. But the close paraphrasing issues must still be resolved, Mach61 and Z1720. Please review the link above and reword or rephrase areas as needed where there is a lot of overlap. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 01:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on December 25[edit]

Zoé Clauzure, Cœur (song)

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)

Created by Moscow Connection (talk). Self-nominated at 23:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Zoé Clauzure; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Full review needed now that QPQs have been provided. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • At 1382 bytes, Cœur (song) is too short for the DYK requirement. Moscow Connection, would you prefer to put the nomination on hold until it's expanded or to withdraw it and go with just the Clauzure article? --Paul_012 (talk) 15:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Note that the IPA template in the lede causes unexpected (incorrect) results from DYK check in the form of about 200 extra characters to its count; the "Cœur" article is indeed short of the 1500 prose characters required and will need to be expanded further. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on December 26[edit]

Euan Duthie, Lord Duthie

(
)

Created by TheBishopAndHolyPrince (talk). Nominated by Storye book (talk) at 18:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Euan Duthie, Lord Duthie; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Per WP:DYKLEN, the minimum length for an article to be eligible for DYK is 1500 characters. This article only barely scrapes by (1503 using my character counting tool). This count includes the rather substantial number of titles he's held, which accounts for a large proportion of the prose. I would appreciate, if possible, even just one more sentence about him that describes what he was doing at these positions or if anyone expressed thoughts about his performance. If not, we can proceed–the article indeed narrowly clears the bar. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:49, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you, Pbritti. I have added some more facts (with citation), and according to DYK Check, the article now has 2379 characters. (I had hesitated to add those facts previously, because they are so depressing). Storye book (talk) 16:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Storye book: Upon review, I have BLPCRIME concerns about the addition. Earwig came back good, so I say you just need to consider some other addition to the article. However, work has suddenly precluded me from further reviewing. My sincerest apologies for leaving you here. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There was actually nothing wrong with the addition that you are talking about, since no names were mentioned. BLPCRIME refers to individuals whose names are mentioned in the article, but my addition did not mention names. The link in the citation gives only newspaper headlines, which do not contain names. In order to find out those names, you would have to pay a subscription to get beyond the paywall - which is not our concern. However, I have replaced my edit with a general list of typical offences encountered by the sheriff. Our next reviewer will therefore have nothing to worry about. Storye book (talk) 09:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Best Sleepover in the World

(
)

Moved to mainspace by DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk). Self-nominated at 02:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/The Best Sleepover in the World; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I will share my thoughts: I would say ALT0, ALT1, ALT5, ALT7 are not very interesting and should probably be stricken. Just my opinion, so don't take it seriously. ALT4 made me laugh and might be something to think about going with as it is unusual and interesting. In addition to ALT4, I prefer ALT2, ALT3, and ALT6; those are my four favorites, but I wonder if the wording could be improved or if you like it the way it is. Viriditas (talk) 19:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Fixed an error.[3] Viriditas (talk) 20:52, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Minor copyedits.[4] I like your prose and writing style, but you've got way too many quotes, some of which can easily be paraphrased. I've noticed that this could be a problem for DYK, so I recommend selectively choosing to paraphrase the majority of your quotes. Viriditas (talk) 21:00, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Review: Way too many quotes, particularly in areas where you don't need to quote. Looking at the article, I think you can easily paraphrase at least 50% of the quotes, most of which are only one or two words (and leave the longer ones) which would be an improvement. Article is new enough and long enough. I prefer the hooks, ALT2, ALT3, ALT4, and ALT6. The rest should be struck, IMO. Viriditas (talk) 21:25, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hey, I am sorry for the lateness. I am currently unwell with impetigo and thus I have not been able to do as much usual editing and that is why I did not reply to this right away. I did some minor changes yesterday, but today I tried cutting down the number of quotes a lot. I have managed to cut down the number of quotes - the thing that I have struggled with is that I am trying to be very careful to not wrongly assume or misrepresent what the quote is saying, so please let me know if I have by accident. Many of the cut quotes I did not initially consider part of the quote count - many were to represent the sources (e.g. saying "her "subtle" messages"", as I was worried it would seem that the article is not abiding to Neutral POV. Thank you so much for your support, genuinely. I think ALT3 and 6 are best, now that I think about it. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 07:35, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No worries. It might help to cross out all the other hooks and highlight just ALT3 and ALT6 so we can move this along. Viriditas (talk) 20:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: While this isn't necessary or required, I recommend rewriting ALT3 and ALT6 (create new ALT7 and ALT8 hooks) to place the linked article first. In ALT3, the article appears as the second link, and in ALT6 it appears as the third link. While this is acceptable, the first links will inevitably steal views from your nomination, meaning less people will read this article. Something to consider. Viriditas (talk) 23:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so so much for this! I reworderd them both to put the link first, but I am unsure if the meaning now sounds unclear for ALT6... DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 06:31, 3 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for continuing to try to improve this article. Looking at the reception section, I still think you can easily paraphrase many of these quotes. My approach is to reserve quotes for when you really can't paraphrase and it's important to get the authorial intent and meaning across. This is not the case here. You should be able to paraphrase most of this. Please give it a try. Viriditas (talk) 08:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: Thank you for trying to paraphrase the reception section and other parts of the article. While I really appreciate what you are trying to do, it might be best to revert back to the previous version, because the attempt to paraphrase didn't work, and the changes ride the line of plagiarism. It may help for you to read our article on paraphrase, or to do a search on "how to paraphrase". I am very sorry about this. Viriditas (talk) 20:21, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Viriditas: This is a quick reply as I'm about to head to bed but I will try again tomorrow/Tuesday after my classes finish – I'm sorry for the stress. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 04:43, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's fine, but many of your earlier attempts to paraphrase are still in the article and are also problematic, so I'm going to make an attempt to fix those earlier attempts. Viriditas (talk) 02:05, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: The problem at hand is pretty bad. I don't want to reject this nomination, but the paraphrasing didn't work, and your earlier attempts at writing the article also have the same problems where you use the same language from the sources, sometimes with quotes, sometimes without. I think the article is short enough for you to go through it, one section at a time, and completely rewrite it. You could have this done in a matter of days. Leave the lead section for last. If you don't see the problem, I can provide many examples. Look at "Release and promotion". You write "Steve Forster, Hampshire County Council's executive member for education, expressed delight that the events took place due to believing that they would help foster a lifetime love of reading and books". That's the same or similar wording from the sources. I think most reviewers would reject at this point, but I really don't want to do that. I'm hoping you can find time to step up and give it a rewrite. I understand if you are busy with school or work and don't have the time to rewrite it, but right now, it is not close to passing in this state. Viriditas (talk) 02:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: Let me know if you are going to address this soon. If you can't, I will reject it. You can try to bring it to GAN to give it a second chance. Viriditas (talk) 19:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am sorry for the lateness, I have been thinking about this a lot and I am unsure of what to do. I have fixed the example you provided (I am not a fan of the current wording and that is why I preferred quotes, but oh well), but for the reception section I am really unsure of what to do. The reason I used quotes mostly is that it is not easy to convey what the reviewer's thoughts are by paraphrasing, as this is not paraphrasing facts but rather their opinions. I have tried several times over the past few days to paraphrase some of the quotes but it is very hard to do without sacrificing the reviewer's intent and detail. I will try again tomorrow but at this point I really do not know what to do. As for GAN, that is almost impossible as there is simply not enough coverage of the novel (believe me, I check every week for more sources so I can expand this article better). I am upset as I was really hoping for this to become a DYK but I genuinely have no idea what to do.DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 21:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To move forward, it might help to compartmentalize the entire process. We are both in agreement with the hooks, so we can put that aside for now and consider it done for the moment. So no need to worry about that. Do the same with all the other criteria. See how much better this is looking? Not so negative, right? So we are down to one problem and one issue alone: close paraphrasing. I understand that you think the previous paraphrasing using quotes was sufficient, but it really wasn't. There were even unquoted parts that were closely paraphrased. So that's the problem, and the old version doesn't work. So how do you move forward? You take it one step at a time and revise each section. It shouldn't take you more than a day or two or three. You currently have five sections. Put the lead aside and do that last since it's a summary of the entire article. So that leaves you four sections to deal with. Pick one and just focus on it for now. Go back and look at the sources, and see how you can better paraphrase it in your own words. The easiest way to do this is read the source, put it aside, and summarize what you just read (or the material you want to paraphrase) in a separate text file, making a note at the end of the sentence referring to the source. If you can't paraphrase without quoting, then you need to learn to paraphrase. Quoting should be used sparingly and should be reserved for significant ideas that can't be paraphrased. That's not the case for your quotes, as you are quoting common words and phrases. But again, the problem isn't just the quotes, it's also the unquoted material which follows too closely from the cited sources. This is why you need to rewrite and revise. Viriditas (talk) 22:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: I see you are making some progress. That's great! How about pinging me and letting me know when you think it's good to go? Take your time, no rush. Although, I have to say, I make the most progress when I pretend I have a deadline to meet. It gives me an extra push in the back of my mind as motivation to work harder and faster. So, I'm giving you a fake, non-existent deadline to meet! :-) Viriditas (talk) 07:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Viriditas: Thank you so much for your kindness and for being so nice and patient, I really appreciate. I have made some changes to the other bits and I just have the reception bit left. I have decided to cut down these three further quotes:
  • "The reviewer, Joanne Brennan, called the book an "absolute delight to read" and that it would "enthral" children" --> The review, Joanne Brennan, enjoyed reading the novel and believed that it would fascinate children.
  • "Pam Norfolk's review in Lancashire Evening Post called the sequel heartwarming and noted that it explored "those all-too-familiar worries about bullying, disabilities, siblings and friendships" that had been depicted in Sleepovers" --> Pam Norfolk from Lancashire Evening Post believed that the book was heartwarming and noted how it explored similar common themes - such as friendships, siblings, bullying and disability - that had been explored in the 2001 novel.
  • "Gwendolyn Smith from i believed that the book did a "particularly good job of capturing the psychodrama of being an eight or nine-year-old girl"." --> "Gwendolyn Smith from i praised the book for it's portrayal of the "psychodrama" of young children.
However, I am really not sure as I am worried that this sort of paraphrasing means that it is not detailed enough. The reason I had used so many quotes in the reception is because I did not want to miss out the meaning and miss out on important details. I am worried that the paraphrasing examples from above are not good enough - I would expect to see this in the lead, not in the reception section, as they are not detailed enough, so I am not sure. Please let me know what you think before I implement the changes. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 16:47, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: Reception sections have a bit more leeway than other sections when it comes to quoting material, but the issue that you keep running into is knowing when to quote and when and how to paraphrase. The best advice I can give you is to learn how to paraphrase by reading about it online, and then practice doing it. If you get it wrong, that's fine, because that's how you learn; we have to make mistakes to move forward. This is true with just about everything. Implement the changes you think are best and we will go from there. Don't be risk averse; if you feel like you are out of your comfort zone, that's a good sign you are on the right track. Viriditas (talk) 23:21, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

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

Overall: Concerns about quoting and close paraphrasing listed above. This has been on DYK since December 28, 2023. Nominator appears to be busy with other things. I would recommend fixing the problems, nominating as GAN and revisiting the DYK in the future when you have more time. Also, I would focus on nominating one DYK at a time, as you have nominated many different DYKs as of late, but have little time to fix them. Please don't take this the wrong way. We all have time commitments. The good news is you can try again with a GA review. Viriditas (talk) 21:10, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much for your explanation. But as I have said before, it is impossible to get this to GA standards, there are not enough sources. I had actually planned to get the reception done tonight after seeing your reply but it is too late now. The reason I nominated 4 at the same time is because they were published at the same time (by me) and I needed to ensure they were nominated within 7 days. The 3 rejections have put me off nominating more for DYK as it has been too stressful. Thank you so much for your support though, I hope it didn't stress you out. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 21:53, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I disagree. I think you can bring this to GAN. You just need to rewrite it in your own words. As for DYK, don’t nominate four at the same time. Work on one at a time until it is approved. Sorry for the bad news, but I don’t think this is the end; change your perspective and you’ll see it is only the beginning. I hope your day improves. Viriditas (talk) 23:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
References

References

  1. ^ Brown, Lauren (13 March 2023). "Jacqueline Wilson's sequel to her classic novel Sleepovers announced by Puffin". The Bookseller. Retrieved 21 December 2023.
  2. ^ Brown, Lauren (13 March 2023). "Jacqueline Wilson's sequel to her classic novel Sleepovers announced by Puffin". The Bookseller. Retrieved 21 December 2023.
  3. ^ Inglis, Louis (16 October 2023). "Jacqueline Wilson dedicates book to YouTube Makaton pair". BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 21 December 2023.
  4. ^ Inglis, Louis (16 October 2023). "Jacqueline Wilson dedicates book to YouTube Makaton pair". BBC News. BBC. Retrieved 21 December 2023.
  5. ^ Lazzeri, Antonella (29 November 2023). "Hythe brownies bedded down for 'The Best Sleepover in the World' in honour of children's author Jacqueline Wilson". Lymington Times and New Milton Advertiser. Highland News and Media Limited. Retrieved 26 December 2023.
  6. ^ Slominski, Stephen (30 October 2023). "Brownies enjoy a magical sleepover in Chandler's Ford library". Eastleigh News. Retrieved 26 December 2023.
  7. ^ Hattenstone, Simon (7 August 2023). "'I wanted to be No 1. But a certain JK Rowling came along': Jacqueline Wilson on rivalry, censorship – and love". TheGuardian.com. Guardian Media Group. Retrieved 26 December 2023.
  8. ^ Brown, Lauren (13 March 2023). "Jacqueline Wilson's sequel to her classic novel Sleepovers announced by Puffin". The Bookseller. Retrieved 21 December 2023.
  9. ^ Hattenstone, Simon (7 August 2023). "'I wanted to be No 1. But a certain JK Rowling came along': Jacqueline Wilson on rivalry, censorship – and love". TheGuardian.com. Guardian Media Group. Retrieved 26 December 2023.


Articles created/expanded on December 29[edit]

Lobster-eye optics

(
)

Created by Artem.G (talk). Self-nominated at 12:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lobster-eye optics; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment: Grammar issues in article; copyedits needed. Also, history section doesn't mention Kaaret & Geissbuehler 1992, but that has no bearing on DYK. ALT0 is redundant to me. In English, saying "lobster-eye optics" implies that it "mimic[s] the structure of lobsters' eyes". So why not just say ... that lobster-eye optics will be used in several planned X-ray space telescopes? Viriditas (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Hey, thanks for the review! Kaaret & Geissbuehler added. I've copyedited the article a bit, but would be grateful if you'll list the issues you see. And you're right, the hook can be trimmed, thanks! Artem.G (talk) 08:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It was proposed in 1979, and first used in the Chinese technology demonstrator spacecraft Lobster Eye Imager for Astronomy Do people really use the full term "technology demonstrator"? This sounds like a Wikipedia term. I've only heard "tech demo" and "prototype", but it may just be the case that this is a new term for me. I've never seen it used in reference to a new telescope. Don't they usually just call it a prototype telescope, or is there a major difference with a "technology demonstrator" spacecraft? Something about the full term doesn't sound right to me. Viriditas (talk) 19:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One of the sources say "SATech-01 is an exploration satellite aimed at test and demonstration of the new technologies", I think that 'technology demonstrator' is the same thing but shorter. Artem.G (talk) 21:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps to you, but I'm not seeing any currency for that usage. I would suggest going with what most sources use and not choosing new and unusual terms. "Technology demonstrator" reads very odd to me, and I don't recall ever seeing it in the literature like this. Viriditas (talk) 21:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I disagree - it's a common term. See for example [5] A technology demonstrator for development of ultra-lightweight, large aperture, deployable telescope for space applications, ESA The camera has been designed as a technology demonstrator, or [6] The Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope Coronagraph Instrument is a critical technology demonstrator for NASA's Habitable Worlds Observatory.. Artem.G (talk) 11:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
TIL. Viriditas (talk) 19:53, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • First major space telescope that uses lobster-eye optics is Chinese Einstein Probe, launched in 2024. That sentence is too informal and needs to be cleaned up. Viriditas (talk) 19:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, I don't understand that. What's informal here that should be changed? EP is the first space telescope with LE Thag is not a prototype, so the sentence is correct. Artem.G (talk) 21:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It reads like broken English to me, or informal discourse. If I was to formalize it for Wikipedia, I might write "The Chinese Einstein Probe is the first major space telescope to use lobster-eye optics." Viriditas (talk) 21:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, will use it! Artem.G (talk) 11:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Lobster-eye optics mimic the structure of the crustacean's (lobster's) eyes, that are made up of long, narrow cells that each reflect a tiny amount of light from a given direction This should be rewritten. Maybe something like: "The eyes of a crustacean are made up of long, narrow cells that each reflect a tiny amount of light from a given direction. Lobster-eye optics technology mimic this structure..." Viriditas (talk)
  • idealized LE optic is almost free from vignetting except near the edge of the FoV Do you mean field of view? You'll need to spell things out for the general reader. Viriditas (talk) 19:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Artem.G: That's just to start, but there's a lot more. I can try to take a closer look later, but I would really recommend getting an editor who specializes in copy editing to also take a look. Viriditas (talk) 19:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, will try GOCE. Artem.G (talk) 21:11, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Query: why is the picture one of a shrimp's eyes when the article is about the optics of lobster's eyes? This doesn't seem to be an appropriate picture to run for this DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • It's called "lobster-eye", but any crustacean eye works for the illustration. I've added "crustacean" to the article. Artem.G (talk)
  • I agree, but you may want to construct a footnote in the article explaining this anatomical similarity. People will easily get confused and this will just come up again. Viriditas (talk) 19:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Several space telescopes that use lobster-eye optics are under construction. Joint French-Chinese SVOM is expected to be launched in July 2024. SMILE, a space telescope project by ESA and the CAS, is planned to be launched in 2025. ESA's THESEUS is now under consideration. This is all unsourced. Viriditas (talk) 20:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Just had another user check this out. This nomination meets and exceeds the requirements. Viriditas (talk) 00:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hey, I missed the reply somehow, sorry for that. I didn't know about this rule, but the text I've copied from LEIA was added there by me just a few days before. Anyway, I wouldn't object if you'll fail this nomination. If not, I'll try to address all remaining comments in the next few days. Artem.G (talk) 07:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm not failing this nomination. I said it meets and exceeds the criteria. I had to be sure, so I asked for additional input. There are a lot of rules and it's difficult to be mindful of them at all times, so I will often ask for help. Also, I very much want to see that cool image of crustacean eyes on the main page, so please, let's fix this article and get it ready. Viriditas (talk) 09:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Nice, thanks! I've very little time this week, but I've copyedited the article a bit, and removed ambiguity about the photo (or so I hope). Artem.G (talk) 13:28, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Artem.G: I know you are busy, but I made some copyedits you should review.[8] I also think the large blockquote in the history section should either be paraphrased by you or cut down to its most important part. Viriditas (talk) 02:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks. That looks good. Viriditas (talk) 09:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the copyedit, everything looks good! I never saw 'biomimetics' used for LE before, but I found several articles that uses it. Artem.G (talk) 18:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The term and its synonyms are quite common in the literature and appear in most of your sources. For example, Hudec & Feldman 2022: "Crustaceans eyes such as lobsters, shrimps and crayfish, provide an excellent oppor-tunity for biomimicking and creating novel X-ray optics." Biomimetics is biomimicry. Viriditas (talk) 00:26, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Artem.G:, do you have access to the 2018 book Remote and Robotic Investigations of the Solar System by Christopher R. Kitchin?[9] You can find copies online or in your local library. I think this source would resolve 99% of any outstanding issues as it explains the entire concept in easy to understand, everyday language and compares it to other similar technology, giving it proper context and coverage. This would greatly help our readers understand the subject. I think if you were to use this source to revise what you currently have, we could probably wrap this up and pass the hook. Please take a look when you have time. Viriditas (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks, will look into it tomorrow! Artem.G (talk) 21:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Artem.G: It's mostly on pp. 122-123, but there's a bit more on p. 128 regarding honeycomb collimaters. The content is fairly small, so I could email it to you, but the book itself does have some nice diagrams and graphics. Viriditas (talk) 19:34, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hey, I've added a bit, please take a look. Artem.G (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Aside from copyediting, I don't think there's anything left to do at this point. Sometimes it's a good idea to have more than one hook available if another reviewer or promoter finds something wrong, but it's not necessary or required. I will try to wrap this up. Viriditas (talk) 08:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Artem.G: Copyedits needed to lead. You forgot to sync the new edits with the old ones. Lead currently says first was Chinese instead of US. Viriditas (talk) 08:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Updated, though LEIA is still important, and NASA's experiment was on sub-orbital rocket.Artem.G (talk) 08:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Lobster-eye optics can be used for backscattering imaging and is used for homeland security, detection of improvised explosive devices, non-destructive testing, and medical imaging

What about writing it this way instead: "Lobster-eye optics can be used for backscattering imaging in homeland security, the detection of improvised explosive devices, non-destructive testing, and medical imaging." Also, this seems out of place considering we are talking about space science applications. Is there a better place to put it or way to incorporate it into the article? You use it to start the section but then launch into space technology demonstrators. Is it even needed? Viriditas (talk) 08:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm leaning towards removal, at least from this section, as it is out of place. Viriditas (talk) 00:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see large parts of the "Description" section were copied from statements made by Goddard PI Jordan Camp in a 2017 NASA article by Madison Arnold, presumably in the public domain. While it may be perfectly acceptable to copy large swaths of content from free sources into Wikipedia, in practice it needs to be done carefully, with attribution, and in a way that makes the content accessible to our readers. In this case, the description is specifically out of context, as it is discussing the X-ray Wide-Field Imager (WFI), it is quoting Camp with no attribution, and it has not been altered to fit the general topic. This is why it is always best to paraphrase, even when you are presented with free content to use, and to mindfully tailor the content to the topic at hand. Viriditas (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Viriditas asked me to take a look at the page, and I'm going to give it a copyedit that I think will help. Seeing the comment just above, however, I want to say that I'm probably not going to check for close paraphrasing, but that all close paraphrasing must have been completely removed before this DYK can be passed.
I also think that the hook should be run without the image of the mantis shrimp eyes. The image does not do much to help the reader understand the telescope mechanisms, and the confusion noted above, that a mantis shrimp is not a lobster, would make for confusion on the main page. (I have no problem with keeping the image at the article.) --Tryptofish (talk) 20:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain_sources suggests that the current use of the content is acceptable, but from an editorial POV, it may need to be cleaned up for other reasons. In other words, close paraphrasing in this particular example is allowed, but it's not something I'm used to dealing with so it's a bit confusing for me. Relevant passage: "A public domain source may be summarized and cited in the same manner as for copyrighted material, but the source's text can also be copied verbatim into a Wikipedia article. If text is copied or closely paraphrased from a free source, it must be cited and attributed through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation, which is usually placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page (see the section "Where to place attribution" for more details)." My initial concern was that the passage used is so far removed from its initial context that there could be some errors involved. That's one of the reasons I wanted an astronomer (or a neuroscientist!) to review it. Viriditas (talk) 20:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd have to do some digging to link to it (and don't feel like doing that), but there have been major scandals in the past about copyvios and overly close paraphrasing in DYK pages, and there is a very strong sense in the community that we don't want anything of that sort appearing on the Main Page. For me, at least, the minimum policy requirements for PD sources is too low a bar. I think a simple way to deal with it is to Google passages from the page, and look at hits that aren't WP mirrors. (I always do that when doing DYK reviews, myself.) Of course, if you have any of the cited sources in hand, you can compare that, too. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:45, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For me, at least, the minimum policy requirements for PD sources is too low a bar. I completely agree, and that's my position as well, but as far as I understand it, the current version is policy compliant, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. As for the example you requested, take a look at this source. That's where some of the content from the "Description" section comes from. As you can see, it might be accurate, and it might be relevant, but it's completely out of context of the original source. I'm not sure if I'm just being too critical and nitpicky or if this needs to be cleaned up. As I said before, this is not how I write or edit articles, so I'm not familiar with the practice of copying free content like this. Viriditas (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you can list any other sources like that, as well, I'll try to clean all of them up. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe it is limited to just three sources, numbered in the reference section itself as citation 1 (Ma et al. 2023), 3 (NASA 2017), and 4 (Zhang et al. 2022). You can tell because each citation says "Material was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0" or "This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain." Viriditas (talk) 21:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've now completed a reasonably careful copyedit of the page, and I feel comfortable supporting it for promotion. I think it's acceptably readable for the subject matter, and it's a very interesting and encyclopedic page. I've also checked it for the paraphrasing issues. I found, and corrected, some overly close copying from the public domain NASA source. I also ran the page through the Earwig tool, to check if I had missed anything, and it passed decisively. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Same as ALT0, but without the image. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tryptofish: Thank you, but I think we can still salvage a top-placed image. Astrophysicist Jordan B. Camp at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center has a relevant image we can use. Because the entire image is composed of three separate images and too long horizontally to use in its original form, I will just cut it up into two images and stack the two on top of one in a square-shape. This will be perfect for use here as it indeed shows a close up view of the eyes of a lobster along with the microchannel plate in comparison. I think its perfect, and I've seen similar images used on DYK before. Viriditas (talk) 02:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I uploaded five images here. I'm not that keen on how they turned out. If anyone wants to use them here, you know where to find them. Viriditas (talk) 20:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, nice images! Artem.G (talk) 09:16, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note, the Mercury Imaging X-ray Spectrometer (MIXS) currently on board BepiColombo (launched 2018) apparently uses similar microchannel geometry.[10][11] Viriditas (talk) 09:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! It's seems to be almost the same, similar to that of the so-called "lobster eye" telescope, except that the channel lengths are chosen to maximise the energy-independent "straight through" component of the flux, rather than the low energy focused component, but I'll update it. Artem.G (talk) 09:16, 16 February 2024 (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: I was hoping we could use an image per the nom's wishes, but after looking into this, and even uploading new images, I don't see any that are truly conducive to the hook at the moment; the main problem was that several different editors expressed concerns about the mantis image and it did lead to unnecessary confusion. Per the above discussion, article is new and long enough, well-sourced, neutral, and copyvio free (although it incorporates public domain content per the nom). The article is presentable, and the QPQ is complete. As far as WP:DYKHOOKCITE goes, it is unfortunate, but there is no single, cited hook in the article that supports the idea "that lobster-eye optics will be used in several planned X-ray space telescopes". Yes, it is a true statement based on many different sources collected by the nominator, but the way DYK generally works is spelled out in WP:DYKG: "The hook should include a definite fact that is unlikely to change, and citations in the article that are used to support the hook fact must verify the hook and be reliable. The wording of the article, hook, and source should all agree with each other with respect to who is providing the information – if the source is not willing to the say the fact in its own voice, the hook should attribute back to the original source as well." With that said, I just spent ten minutes looking for sources that could support this hook. I could not find any. The closest source I could find to supporting this hook is this one, but it's incredibly ambiguous and isn't good enough. We need a solid hook, firmly backed by at least a single source, that is unambiguous and reliable. Since Tryptofish has shown interest in this topic, perhaps they could offer some ideas for new hooks. I notice that there's no information about the role played by the French company Photonis and researchers at the University of Leicester in bringing this technology to fruition. That could make a good hook. More information here and here. Viriditas (talk) 21:59, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • ALT2: ... that lenses for telescopes are being designed using optics inspired by lobster eyes?
I think that's well-sourced on the page, because it's about the lens design instead of about future space missions. And I think it's hook-y. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:34, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Tryptofish: Thanks. While it is true that in general, telescope lenses are designed using optics based on lobster eye geometry, how about composing a hook that gets into the meat and potatoes of the article, describing 1) what makes the eyes of lobsters special (reflective eyes) and 2) how it was emulated, designed, and applied to X-ray optics technology for the purpose of capturing transient astronomical events? And, try to write that in only 70-160 characters. To me, that captures the heart of this subject while conveying the essential information to our readers. Are you up for writing an awe-inspiring ALT3, or do you think we should settle on ALT2? Viriditas (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was about to reply ALT2, but if we're willing to settle for not-quite awe-inspiring, then:
  • ALT3: ... that lenses for telescopes are being designed using optics inspired by the reflective properties of lobster eyes?
If you like that addition, OK, but I could also make a case for ALT2, because it leaves the reader with more reasons to click-through. I'm fine with either 2 or 3. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would help ALT2 and ALT3 to eliminate passive voice. The general sense of "lenses for telescopes" skips and misses out on the entire focus on X-ray optics and the search for transients, which is what the lobster eye design makes possible, but I suppose I will have to live with that. Viriditas (talk) 00:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ALT4: ... that optics intended for X-ray telescopes are inspired by the reflective properties of lobster eyes?
If you want to get transients in there too, I'll leave that to you. :) --Tryptofish (talk) 00:33, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can't propose and review a hook. In terms of the above, isn't it much easier and to the point to just say "that X-ray space telescopes use optics inspired by the reflective properties of lobster eyes?" Viriditas (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I had two reasons for doing it that way. First, I felt it necessary to say "intended for" because of your concern that we don't have enough sourcing for "will be used in", in ALT0. Second, I put the link to the nominated page at the beginning, because of your concern (that we discussed elsewhere) that you don't want a blue link to precede the link to the nominated page (although I suppose we could just not link to X-ray telescopes – but it does seem to me to be something that needs to be linked). In any case, my opinion is that this is DYK not FA, and it's time to declare victory and move on. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"But my list of concerns is much longer!" Viriditas reaches into his vest and pulls out a long elfin scroll, the kind of scroll you might find in Santa's workshop, which promptly unfurls and rolls across the floor, making a series of paper-like rustling sounds, until the scroll finishes unfolding, clear across the room. Viriditas (talk) 23:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dora and the Fantastical Creatures

(
)

5x expanded by Zingo156 (talk). Self-nominated at 06:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Dora and the Fantastical Creatures; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • This is my first time reviewing a DYK nomination, so I would like a second opinion on this.
    • According to DYKcheck, you started 5x expanding on December 28, 2023. You nominated the article for DYK the day after, so it passes newness in this case.
    • Article is long enough (4601 characters).
    • The current hook you have proposed (ALT0) is not really interesting. I'd recommend that you come up with a new one.
    • The article needs some work, especially in the "Reception" section. It uses the "X said Y" format, which is discouraged. See this essay for ideas.
    • Earwig detected quotes used in the article that are properly cited to their sources.

Davest3r08 >:) (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zingo156 have you seen the above? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:11, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Davest3r08 AirshipJungleman29 apologies for not answering speedily. Yeah, I will address the articles problems before the end of January. Zingo156 (talk) 07:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Zingo156: Have the issues been resolved, and thus this is ready for a review? If issues are not resolved soon, this nomination might be closed as unsuccessful. Z1720 (talk) 16:22, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Z1720: Yeah I just attended to them. Sorry for the wait. Zingo156 (talk) 15:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Davest3r08: Per the above, this nomination is ready for you to continue your review. Z1720 (talk) 18:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you @Z1720. (courtesy pinging @Zingo156)
Anyways:

Articles created/expanded on December 30[edit]

Madeleine Steere

(
)

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 05:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Madeleine Steere; 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: Nice work on this article! I only have a couple small issues that need addressing before I can pass this: the lead section is too short, it should really be expanded given the amount of information in the text of the article; and the first "a" in the "australia women's" section should be capitalised. Grnrchst (talk) 12:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @Grnrchst: Thank you for your review. The said issues are addressed. Please check. CeeGee 09:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for seeing to it! I still think the lead could be a bit longer, but am happy to pass this review the now. Nice work :) --Grnrchst (talk) 09:39, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you for approving. You are free to expand the lede. CeeGee 06:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It's not interesting to me, but I don't know anything about college sports either. Why is "2018 All-American team" in scare quotes? What in particular makes this interesting? They have an all-american team every year. What makes this person being selected to it special? Grammar nit: shouldn't it be "selected for" instead of "selected in"?
  • CeeGee I don't think this hook meets the interestingness criterion. Is it possible for you to find a better one? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I have also tagged it as needing copyediting; there are numerous odd errors ("She capped in 67 international matches", "She enjoyed her team's champions title", etc.). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Copyedited accordingly. I can not locate "etc." Thanks for your check. CeeGee 06:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You have not. CeeGee, it might be good for you to nominate this article at WP:GOCE. In any case, you have not provided a new hook; unless you propose a new one which meets the criteria, this nomination will be rejected. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:02, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on December 31[edit]

Angie Appleton

(
)

Created by DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk). Self-nominated at 00:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Angie Appleton; 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: None required.

Overall: This was a fun article to review, not what I expected and I think that's what makes this a good DYK. The copyvio tool flagged this article a couple times but after checking all the copyvio flags were for quotes which were handled correctly. Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: the same issues outlined by theleekycauldron at Template:Did you know nominations/Lacey Lloyd apply here. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:45, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I haven't replied to the other DYK yet as I am unwell, but I honestly do not see what the issue is with this article. There are reliable sources not only from Digital Spy, Radio Times, What to Watch and Inside Soap, but also sources from Female First, Manchester Evening News, Woman's Own, Liverpool Echo, OK! and other completely non-TV related news outlets. There is information that talks about the character's storylines, yes, but this is essential in order to explain the out of universe infob– for example, Angie's feud with Mary links to the reception that was received from viewers and links to how the soap was praised for depicting post-natal depression, and it also affects her characterisation; the marital problems section also links to how viewers wanted to see Angie with another man and also leads to the character's departure; the introduction section shows how Angie's character changed the dynamics of other characters and storylines; Angie accusing Mary of hurting her son showed how fans had been making fan theories about the storyline and showed how the actress was worried about receiving hate from the role, and so on. Plus, nearly all of the information is accompanied by the actor's thoughts on the stoylines and development of the character. So yes, there is sourced information about the storylines, but this is needed in order to properly talk about the out of universe info. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 15:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)#Reply[reply]
The issue is that there is excessive detail on the in-universe information @DaniloDaysOfOurLives:. Take the "Feud with Mary and postpartum depression" section—there are over 900 words of plot details, which according to you are all essential to explain the 200 words of out-of-universe information? Not even a third of them are "essential"; most of them could easily be cut without compromising the article's intelligibility or comprehensiveness.
WP:WAF, which requires that the prose length "be carefully balanced with the length of the other sections, as well as the length of the story itself" is a guideline, and thus not optional. Also remember WP:NOTEVERYTHING, which is policy: Information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful. A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject.. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:54, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: Have you addressed AirshipJungleman29's concerns? Z1720 (talk) 02:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DaniloDaysOfOurLives has been editing Wikipedia, but has not returned to address these concerns. Unless DDOOL returns, or someone is willing to adopt this nomination, this should be closed. Z1720 (talk) 18:23, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I started trimming down the article about a week ago, but I realised that if I trimmed the article even more, then the content would be compromised and the article's quality would be reduced. Hence, unfortunately I am considering withdrawing this nomination. I really did not want to, as I spent a LONG time on this article and it was already approved and ready to go, but I would rather the quality stay good rather than cut things out just for a DYK. I will try to cut a bit more this weekend and ping back later. DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 19:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sunehri Bagh Masjid

(
)

Created by TheAafi (talk). Self-nominated at 11:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sunehri Bagh Masjid; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Not a review, and I review oldest first so I probably wouldn't touch this for at least another month and a half (but would not object to any other editor doing so in the interim): The Times of India is not a reliable source.--Launchballer 14:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Launchballer Thanks for the note. Times of India is not the only source to support the fact. I have changed it on this nomination to The Indian Express, which is considered reliable. I will rework on the article and try removing TOI resources although the two sources are unlikely to fall under what is considered "unreliable/biased" on this publication, but I take your note. ─ The Aafī (talk) 14:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The context is that the hook should be cited to a reliable source. Full review needed.--Launchballer 09:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Launchballer, The hook is of-course cited to reliable source. See WP:INDIANEXP and also WP:THEHINDU. I had added the link to Indian Express piece this nomination, and in the article the fact is also supported by a TheHindu piece. Best regards, ─ The Aafī (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My apologies, that should have said 'which it now is'. Full review still needed.--Launchballer 16:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheAafi: Thank you for your work on this article. Please consider rewriting ALT0, and creating new hooks. The phrasing of "that Sunehri Bagh mosque in New Delhi has been recommended to be demolished for resolving traffic problems" doesn't work for me. The original wording in the current article is must better, so I don't know why you went with this instead. Viriditas (talk) 07:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Viriditas:, thanks for the review. I tried to re-think and the following hooks appear in my immediate thought. Do you have any ideas? I'd appreciate your assistance. ─ Aafī (talk) 11:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: @TheAafi: Please focus on providing better sources in your hooks. For example, ALT0 is poorly sourced (the cited source doesn't really support it) and ALT, ALT2, and ALT3 don't show sources on this page. Remember to make sure that there is a close parity between the proposed hook and the source, with no interpretation required by the reviewer. Viriditas (talk) 19:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Viriditas, I'm sorry that you've had to struggle with this, and indeed I should have been clear and revised the sources. The hooks are based on multiple sources. Citation 14 in the article rightly supports the fact, "the NDMC had recommended the removal of the 150-year-old mosque to the HC “for safe and smooth flow of traffic”, citing that it falls in a high-security zone where Parliament and Central government offices are located." The same citation should work for anything related to proposed removal. ALT3's other part is verified by Citations 2 and 7 in the article. I hope this helps. ─ Aafī (talk) 03:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, thank you, that's quite a different picture altogether, and it clears up a lot of questions I had. You have me curious though. Why, if you have all these great hooks in the article, are you rewriting them for the nomination? I mean, even up above, where you quote and write "the NDMC had recommended the removal of the 150-year-old mosque to the HC 'for safe and smooth flow of traffic', citing that it falls in a high-security zone where Parliament and Central government offices are located"--that's perfect material for a great hook; why aren't you using it? The hooks you are using here don't have the same information or interest. Try writing a hook in your own words that says just that. I'll pass it. Viriditas (talk) 08:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Viriditas, I returned to DYK after a long break and perhaps this is the reason and answer to your question. Some more homework and here is what I have gotten into my mind. ─ Aafī (talk) 10:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: I think you've almost got it. Regarding the discussion about the WP:TOI up above, I think Launchballer was very wise to remind you of the issues surrounding it. Looking closer at how you use it in the article, I don't see a problem, and since I am more liberal than other editors when it comes to sourcing (provided they are used correctly), I am inclined to allow it as there is no consensus on the larger matter, but you should be aware that other editors may disagree and this could impact future article improvement efforts. I will continue the review. Viriditas (talk) 19:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have finished reading the article. I am not as familiar with the variant of English used in this article (Indian English?) so I will not be making or recommending any grammatical changes. The article is a very nice read, but the only thing that stands out in my mind is the paucity of content in the lead section. While it is certainly true that this is perfectly acceptable for small articles nominated for DYK, and most of the time this is not a problem, I think that in this case it could lead to neutrality issues, since the lead indicates that the mosque is in imminent danger of being torn down. But when we read the article, we see that, putting politics aside for a moment, that the mosque is not in danger of being torn down at the moment. I think some effort should be made to expand the lead to clarify the nature of the problem at hand by giving more context. This could be done by more accurately summarizing the main points. Other than that, I am almost ready to pass. Viriditas (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Viriditas, you've caught the very right thing. My English is mix but the article should be using Indian variant. I have modified the lede and summarised some information there. ─ Aafī (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2024 (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: Awaiting new hooks to approve. Earwig doesn't show anything consequential but random spot checks reveal instances of close paraphrasing that need to be resolved. The Indian Express writes "Of the four roundabouts studied, the report found only the Sunehri Bagh Masjid roundabout did not need any interventions." This article writes, without quotes "According to Indian Express, the removal proposal issued by the NDMC contradicts a 2021 traffic study submitted by the Central Public Works Department which found that the Sunehri Masjid roundabout did not need any intervention." Best practice on Wikipedia is either to quote the material or to paraphrase it, neither of which are the case here. Obviously, this is very minor, but this kind of thing needs to be fixed, especially if it can be found elsewhere in the article. So go back and make sure you are either quoting or paraphrasing. (Issues resolved) I like what you are trying to do with ALT4a, but you could shorten it considerably if you desired. There's also potential for other hooks as well. Also please use the Source: My source here format next to your hook proposals so that others don't have to hunt for your sources. (Issues resolved). Re-reading the hooks up above, I still think the language can be improved. I struck ALT0 because it just doesn't work in English, and I struck ALT3 since it was sourced to TOI and that's a non-starter for a hook. I also struck ALT1 and ALT2 per comments below. Viriditas (talk) 20:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Viriditas Thanks for the review. I have re-worked on this part in the article and also included a source for the Alt4 and 4a above alongside sourcing it in the article. ─ Aafī (talk) 20:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let's see what you've got:
... that the New Delhi Municipal Council proposed the removal of Sunehri Bagh mosque for a better traffic management? (The Hindu)
Typically in the US, when we are talking about removing a structure to improve road conditions, we say it is to relieve traffic congestion. I don't think we should use this hook because as you explain in the article, this proposal is both challenged and contradicted by another proposal which says otherwise. This kind of hook can be problematic when the content says otherwise and it only presents one view. So I will strike it. Viriditas (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
... that Sunehri Bagh mosque in New Delhi is subject to a demolition notice from the New Delhi Municipal Council for a better traffic management? (The Hindu)
"Subject to a demolition notice...for a better traffic management" is closer in intent, but grammatically sounds off to me. You could always go with "to relieve traffic congestion", but this again brings us back to the problem with ALT1. So I would strike this as well. Viriditas (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
... that New Delhi Municipal Council had proposed the removal of a 150-year old mosque "citing that it falls in a high-security zone where Parliament and Central government offices are located"? (TheHindu)
Putting a link to the New Delhi Municipal Council before the article will steal views and result in less people visiting your article. I won't strike this, but I will recommend that you do. Viriditas (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
... that a 150-year old mosque in New Delhi was recommended to be removed for existing in a high-security zone and reportedly creating traffic snarls? (The Hindu)
I think this is one of your better hooks so far, but still needs work. For example, you could also word the hook in a way that says the proposed demolition of Sunehri Bagh Masjid, a 150-year old mosque with a Grade-III heritage classification, was challenged in Delhi High Court. There are many different variations of this, but the point I'm trying to make is not to just assert the proposed demolition, but to show that it is being actively challenged per the article. This makes for a more accurate and neutral hook. Another way you can approach this is to show how there are competing proposals, one for demolition and one for preservation. That would make a great hook with much interest for our readers! The NDMC proposed to demolish the mosque to relieve traffic congestion, while the earlier CPWD traffic study found no problems with traffic congestion. That's a bit more complex to word, but as you can see, there is an infinite diversity in infinite hook combinations available to you. Play around with it and find one that you like! Viriditas (talk) 22:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Viriditas. I take your notes and have instantly worked on the following hooks. Let me know if these work? ─ Aafī (talk) 06:58, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheAafi: Please add "a" to ALT4b so that it reads "... that the proposed demolition of a 150-year old mosque with a Grade-III heritage classification in New Delhi was challenged in the Delhi High Court?" I can't approve my own hook, so if you like that, I will need to pass this review on to another reviewer. I was hoping you understood that I was just giving you examples to work with, not actual hooks. But if you prefer ALT4b, let me know, and I will ask someone else to review this. As for ALT5 and ALT6, I think you're getting close, but 1) you shouldn't use a link before your hook because it steals views (delink NDMC), and 2) we can't really use abbreviations like NDMC and CPWD in a hook because nobody will know what they meant. Again, I think you were taking my suggestions way too literally. Ideally, what I want you to do is get creative and come up with hooks that are unique to your own formulation. Viriditas (talk) 08:57, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks once again Viriditas, I have taken some more time to go through all of our conversation and formed few hooks by getting out of the box. I will try forming some more tomorrow once I get free (I have a major occupancy tomorrow). Meanwhile, if you find any of the following hooks interesting (some are just re-works of previous ones), please let me know. Best regards, ─ Aafī (talk) 18:46, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 1[edit]

Gallery (New Orleans)

(
)
Iron galleries in New Orleans
Iron galleries in New Orleans

Created by Z22 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:38, 8 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gallery (New Orleans); 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: No - The linked document does not explicitly state that galleries are wider than balconies at the stated page number.
  • Interesting: Yes
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Need some source clarification. SounderBruce 02:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source does not explicitly say they are wider but it says the widths cover the entire sidewalk in comparison to 3-4 feet for balconies. If we should not imply by using general knowledge that sidewalk is 4+ feet, then we can have another hook like:
ALT1: ... that in New Orleans, galleries (example pictured) differ from balconies in that galleries extend over the sidewalks and have supporting posts?
Or something else that you may want to suggest. Z22 (talk) 05:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The new hook is clunky and has an unnecessary repeat of the word "gallery". Upon a second look at the article, there's quite a bit of copyediting that is needed; passages like "the fashion had moved on with the time to catch up with the modern architecture" are really hard to parse. SounderBruce 05:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it easier to read just to say something like these instead?
ALT2a: ... that in New Orleans, galleries (example pictured), unlike balconies, feature supporting posts?
ALT2b: ... that in New Orleans, galleries (example pictured) distinguish themselves from balconies through the addition of supporting posts?
ALT2c: ... that in New Orleans, galleries (example pictured) differ from balconies because they feature supporting posts?
Or you are thinking that we need something completely different? Any suggestions are appreciated. Z22 (talk) 02:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
BTW, I had some edits to improve readability. Let me know if you still spot the parts that require more work. Thanks. Z22 (talk) 03:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SounderBruce: Not sure if there are things that we should still improve. Let me know your feedback. Thanks. Z22 (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's still in pretty rough shape, with passages such as "to support the Confederate", "The later is notable", "The destruction also happened", and "left the city unscratched" all needing to be fixed up among other examples. I don't think this is suitable unless a full copyedit is completed. SounderBruce 07:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your patience on this. I made a few revisions, really putting in the effort to edit the whole page. Not just the things you mentioned. I tackled the entire piece. I think it should be in good shape now, but if you're not feeling it, we could use another pair of eyes from another editor to help with copyediting? Z22 (talk) 22:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Robbery Bob

(
)
  • ... that Robbery Bob, Angry Birds, and Cut the Rope were published by the same company? Source: [17]: "Ever since striking gold with games like Angry Birds and Cut The Rope, Chillingo has been rapidly firing out cutesy physics-based iOS puzzlers in hopes of once again finding App Store glory."
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: This is my third DYK nomination. This one is for the 2024 WikiCup.

Created by TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk). Self-nominated at 07:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Robbery Bob; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @TrademarkedTWOrantula: New enough, long enough and nominated on time. I spot checked references and found that they line up. The references are just ok, but many references for video games appear to be of similar quality. There is a fair use image in the article and the article is in MOS:ORDER.
Layout
  1. The hook is not in the article. There is no Angry Birds or Cut the Rope in the article. We will need to either add that information with the citation or come up with a new hook which is based in the real world WP:DYKFICTION.
  2. The Release section is just a few words and looks orphaned - can you combine it elsewhere?
  3. The sequel section is also too short to have a section - can you combine it elsewhere?
Combined sections. TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 04:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just spitballing a hook idea.
I like this hook, but I'd quote the word "cringeworthy". TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 04:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TrademarkedTWOrantula: Added the quotation marks. going forward others will also make decisions about the hook punctuation. We need another reviewer now, hopefully one will come along to approve the hook both you and I approved. I hope you stick around and continue to contribute to DYK. Bruxton (talk) 05:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Source says "moments of", yet the hook implies all of it was. May I suggest:
ALT2: ... that AJ Dellinger of Gamezebo thought that Robbery Bob contained cringeworthy dialogue? (I think you can get away without quotes seeing as it's already attributed, but I'll leave that decision to a prepbuilder.)--Launchballer 10:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 2[edit]

Catodontherium

(
)
  • ... that Catodontherium had a prior genus name that was mistakenly thought to have been used before and therefore was replaced? Source: Classification of Mammals: Above the Species Level, pg. 406 ("'Proposed on the grounds that Catodus is preoccupied by Catodon Linnaeus, 1761. This is not preoccupation, but Catodus was a numen nudum in its earlier publication (1905) so that Catodontherium may be retained' (Simpson, 1945:147)"
    • Reviewed:

Created by PrimalMustelid (talk). Self-nominated at 16:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Catodontherium; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Starting Review--Kevmin § 15:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Article new enough and long enough, though a bit dense for a lay reader at times. no copyvio issues identified and hook source verified. I think we should maybe look at wordmithing of the hook itself so it flows a little better and is a little more concise.--Kevmin § 17:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, we will need another set of eyes to give a verification that the new hook I proposed is acceptable then, The article overall is ready for passing, as it has no copyvio issues. is new enough and long enough, and does not have any notable rules issues.--Kevmin § 18:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Article says "the genus may have been renamed because of apparent preoccupation of a prior genus name Catodon". If the article equivocates, so should the hook.--Launchballer 18:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Launchballer Alt1 does that with the verbiage "due to a misunderstanding"--Kevmin § 19:17, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, but the article says 'may', while the hook does not.--Launchballer 20:35, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Asakusa Culture Tourist Information Center

(
)
Asakusa Culture Tourist Information Center in 2016
Asakusa Culture Tourist Information Center in 2016

Created by DarkNight0917 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Asakusa Culture Tourist Information Center; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 6[edit]

South Africa v. Israel (Genocide Convention)

(
)
The International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice

Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Self-nominated at 22:29, 6 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/South Africa v. Israel (Genocide Convention); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

New article, long enough, fully supported by both primary and secondary source provided, and is interesting. No problems facing the bold-linked articles. QPQ has been done. The hook is neutral and factual and does not hold any opinions. The nomination is good to go. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I oppose that User:Makeandtoss will review this nomination he is involved in this WP:CTOP WP:ARBPIA area we need another reviewer that is not involved in the area. Suggest NPOV hook

There is no such thing as you oppose my review, which is based on WP guidelines, nor is there such a thing as requiring another reviewer who is not involved in the area. The original hook is factual and does not have opinions in it, unlike the one you suggested. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The WP:DYKRR is clear "use common sense here, and avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest." you edited this article and other articles in the WP:CTOP area. The original hook gives only prominence of South Africa POV so there is nothing neutral in it --Shrike (talk) 11:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've had people edit an article of mine before and edit in the topic area in question and still approve my nomination. It's not really that bit of a deal, so long as they are properly going through the requirements of approval. By the way, your proposed ALT is way more biased than the original hook and, considering you publicly state on your account that you are from Israel, you're the one that looks like they have a conflict of interest here and really should not be proposing such a hook. SilverserenC 16:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1 is grammatically incorrect. starship.paint (RUN) 12:18, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose original formulation and ALT1. The original proposal throws in the apartheid allegation, which is out of scope of the Genocide Convention and will not be adjudicated by the ICJ. ALT1 also cites an emotive and non-substantive "blood libel" rebuttal rather than the actual reasons that Israel denied the charges at the ICJ, namely that they are acting in self-defense and that the official directives of the authorities conducting the war do not show any genocidal intent. ALT3 seems to be best alternative, as it is a NPOV statement of fact that gets at the heart of the issue that the ICJ has been asked to rule on (in the short term). --Chefallen (talk) 17:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT2: ... that during South Africa's genocide case against Israel, the Israeli legal team argued that the International Court of Justice had no jurisdiction over the war in Gaza? Source: Haaretz starship.paint (RUN) 12:40, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seems to me as a good suggestion though in my opinion the article is not stable yet Shrike (talk) 13:47, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @Starship.paint: no objection in principle, and the proposed hook is entirely factual. My concern is that the statement leads a reader to assume that by jurisdiction we mean something it doesn’t mean. Shaw’s argument on the topic of jurisdiction was: (1) a procedural question about whether SA had given Israel enough time to discuss ahead of the case, and (2) whether there really is enough evidence to confirm the proposed facts of the case and the intent required therein. Plus none of this technical argument is currently explained in the article. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, I'll have to look into this once I am free. I think we have time as the article will stabilize in the meantime. starship.paint (RUN) 23:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're right Onceinawhile, I found a source giving a description that roughly matches (1), whether there was an actual dispute between South Africa and Israel regarding their responses to each other. In that case ALT2 is potentially misleading. I've withdrawn it in the meantime. starship.paint (RUN) 06:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT3: ... that South Africa's genocide case against Israel is aimed at persuading the International Court of Justice to order a ceasefire in Israel's war in Gaza? Source: Haaretz starship.paint (RUN) 09:44, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support this version. NPOV statement of fact that gets at the heart of the issue that the ICJ has been asked to rule on, unlike original and ALT1. --Chefallen (talk) 17:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Chefallen and Shrike: - would either of you like to approve ALT3 then and mark this nomination as ready? I mean, the opposition to original hook and ALT1 is clear, surely the DYK promoter would not choose those. starship.paint (RUN) 15:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As the court rejected the cease fire demand we need to reflect this in hook [22] --Shrike (talk) 17:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT3 is factually incorrect taking a strict view. And its given source is dated Jan 11, well before the recent Order with detailed discussion, so the source is speculative. South Africa did not ask for a two sided "ceasefire". Going to the ICJ judgement, it records that South Africa asked for "The State of Israel shall immediately suspend its military operations in and against Gaza" (page 3). SA actually asked for a one-sided "suspension", not a "ceasefire". So a DNY claiming something that is demonstrably not in the actual Order is a pretty silly. The ICJ did in fact order a provisional measure that Israel prevent the commission of "(a) killing members of the group (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group", (measure 1 on pages 24-25) where "group" is roughly the Palestinian population of Gaza, so did in fact order something approximating to what SA asked. (As Palestine (or Hamas) is not a State Party to the Convention, I doubt that ICJ can actually order either of them to do things, hence SA did not ask for that.) Rwendland (talk) 21:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. ALT3 is simply not correct - the case is aimed at stopping an actual or potential genocide, depending on your point of view. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Struck. starship.paint (RUN) 02:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What was wrong with the original main hook again? It was completely factual per the ICJ filing by South Africa and is interesting because apartheid isn't as much discussed about the filing as compared to the genocide aspect. SilverserenC 02:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ALT4: ... that during South Africa's genocide case against Israel, the International Court of Justice initially ordered Israel to "punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide" against Palestinians in Gaza? Source: ABC News starship.paint (RUN) 02:47, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 7[edit]

Yes, And?

(
)

Created by Lk95 (talk). Nominated by Your Power (talk) at 04:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Yes, And?; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Lk95 and Your Power: A QPQ is still needed for this nom. If this is not provided in a few days, this will be marked for closure. Z1720 (talk) 15:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Doing a review. New enough at time of nom, no copyvio, long enough, two free use images (one in infobox and one of music video). To my understanding these should be ok, with the music video's image having a weaker case. QPQ done, sourcing good, article itself mostly good (there's some cleanup work that needs to be done, a good chunk of unsourced statements. Presumably this happened after your work). My main concern is the hook; it expresses I think a subjective statement without attribution to a source written in, potentially going against WP:VOICE. The hook could potentially be reworded to include an inline attribution or potentially just rewritten. My two cents, but as an unfamiliar reader I'd assume "her new x" implies it matches some qualities of her previous work, presumably popularity. I'm not familiar, do you think that the song achieved similar popularity to Thank U, Next, looking back now around a month later? Unfortunately this review came a bit late; maybe the speculative voice in the hook would work better if it had been reviewed sooner. toobigtokale (talk) 02:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Lk95 and Your Power: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 02:18, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lk95 and Your Power have both been editing Wikipedia but have not returned to address the above. Unless they comment here, or someone is willing to adopt this nomination, this should be closed. Z1720 (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gebhard Schädler

(
)

Created by TheBritinator (talk). Self-nominated at 22:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gebhard Schädler; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • ALT1 checks out. That said, I suggest that the words "academically trained" aren't necessary, hence the hook could be simplified. I haven't done the other DYK checks; hence no tick. Schwede66 20:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Full review needed now that an alternative hook has been suggested. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 9[edit]

Mullae Park

(
)
  • ... that a bust of South Korean president Park Chung Hee in Mullae Park had a Japanese Rising Sun Flag tied to it and was dragged through the streets? Source: [23] (in Korean). Relevant quote and translation: 2000년 민족문제연구소 회원 등이 박정희가 '한 목숨 다해 충성함'이라는 충성혈서까지 써서 만주국 일본군관학교에 입학했고, 이후 일본군 장교로 복무한 친일 경력에 주목해 이 흉상에 욱일승천기를 씌운 뒤 밧줄로 묶어 쓰러트려 홍익대로 가져가려다가 징역 1년 6개월 형을 선고받았다. -> In 2000, members of the Center for Historical Truth and Justice announced that Park Chung Hee had sworn a blood oath where he wrote "Service Until Death" in order to enter a Japanese military academy, afterwards, with focus on his role as a Japanese collaborator, a Rising Sun Flag was tied to the bust, the bust was knocked over, and it was dragged to Hongik University. For this a one year and six month prison sentence was given.

Created by Toobigtokale (talk). Self-nominated at 16:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mullae Park; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 10[edit]

Stefano Černetić

(
)

Created by BuySomeApples (talk). Self-nominated at 02:27, 20 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Stefano Černetić; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • The DYK is certaily interesting, and the sources cited support the statement. I'm IAR'ing the 9/10 days, given the AfD and the very interesting hook, so no problems there. I can't find the corresponding source and body text for the fact he falsely claimed to be a prince of Macedonia, so that BLP issue needs to be sorted. I'll need to do a further spot-check still for BLP/copyvio. Earwig is clean, QPQ is done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:56, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I've done spot checks on four paragraphs, showing good text-source integrity and no copyvio/transvio :). Minor point: What make Wine Spectator a reliable source? This may be subjective, but this seems a bit too close to gossip to me? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ethics (Abelard)

(
)

Created by Kingoflettuce (talk). Self-nominated at 21:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ethics (Abelard); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 11[edit]

Myanmar Photo Archive

(
)

Created by Munfarid1 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Myanmar Photo Archive; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 12[edit]

HorsegiirL

(
)

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 23:52, 12 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/HorsegiirL; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Hook is not accurate, because it wasn't an actual horse. Gatoclass (talk) 19:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1: struck for privacy reasons, see history
ALT2: ... that the British DJ Arielle Free was suspended from BBC Radio 1 for a week after criticising horsegiirL's "My Barn My Rules" live on air?
ALT3: ... that horsegiirL's "My Barn My Rules" appeared on Dazed's "20 best tracks of 2023" list?--Launchballer 22:24, 20 January 2024 (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: All three alts verified; my preference is for alt1. Gatoclass (talk) 15:14, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Pulled over BLP privacy concerns. There is no ironclad secondary RS about the real name, and mentioning it seems to be against the subject's wishes. We definitely should not run ALT1, and I don't think we should have the subject's real name in the article at all. —Kusma (talk) 09:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A BLP privacy concern is a DYK showstopper. Schwede66 09:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for picking that up, Kusma. In reviewing the nomination, it never even occurred to me that the nominator might not have an ironclad link for so basic a fact as the identity of the artist, so did not check that particular hook fact. It seems from this point I cannot even rely on nominators to know the identity of their own subject, and I am really pissed about that because it just made all my future reviewing that much harder. Gatoclass (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gatoclass, I would have likely missed this too, but fortunately Bernzrdo asked the right question on the talk page (after you had approved the nom). Also, I think the identification of the subject's name is likely correct, but it is all WP:SYNTH and not usable on a BLP, certainly not against the subject's wishes, and doubly certainly not on the Main Page. —Kusma (talk) 10:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Kusma, and yes, I very much agree, it's lucky that this was caught before it went to the MP. Gatoclass (talk) 10:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Her name appears in this source on Refresher (magazine) [cs], which seems reliable. I'll take another look at this when I get back.--Launchballer 10:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've expanded this slightly, although I'm slightly worried about the number of quotes in her early life - although arguably in this case, they really should be attributed.--Launchballer 11:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Gatoclass: Have the above concerns been addressed? Z1720 (talk) 18:28, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lewes Friends Meeting House, Horsham Friends Meeting House

( Comment or view )
Horsham Friends Meeting House in 2018
Horsham Friends Meeting House in 2018
  • ... that the Friends meeting houses in both Lewes and Horsham (pictured) were built in the 1780s for Quaker communities which have met continuously in those towns since the 17th century? Source: Reports from the Quaker Meeting Houses Heritage Project for the respective meeting houses, as cited in the articles: ref [1] for Lewes, ref [9] for Horsham; but for Horsham perhaps more clearly expressed in the Victoria County History of Sussex (ref [5]).

Created by Hassocks5489 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lewes Friends Meeting House; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Nippy (Better Call Saul)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Dcdiehardfan (talk). Self-nominated at 04:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Nippy (Better Call Saul); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Not a review, and I review oldest first so I probably wouldn't get to this much before late February (but would not object to any other editor reviewing this in the meantime); WP:NYPOST is not a reliable source, so if you wanted that hook, you would need to find a better source.--Launchballer 08:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks @Launchballer. I also was thinking that in the back of my mind about the NY Post thing, and had to use it as it was the only primary source of the actor being interviewed saying so, unfortunately. I'll address the issue, and have opted to replace the primary hook with a new one, as shown above. Thank you for notifying me. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Usual practice is to strike and propose new hooks as opposed to replacing them (since otherwise my comment doesn't make sense). The problem you have is that the NY Post is sufficiently unreliable that we don't trust them to not make it up, so we can't be sure that that interview did in fact happen. Thank you for the extra hook - full review needed.--Launchballer 11:30, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Apologies for the error. I understand the NY Post error, so hopefully that should be fixed. With that being said, I plan on making ALT3 the prime hook. I look forward to the review, thank you. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 04:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Launchballer: I reviewed the page for GA but didnt bring up the source becasue given its an interview I thought that it was okay, should it be removed regaurdless? Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 20:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would do so.--Launchballer 20:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant:, thank you for removing the content. @Launchballer: Sorry for the belated response, but I believe all the requirements should be addressed. At this current point, the actual DYK review awaits us, right? -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 00:44, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have a firm policy of doing my QPQs oldest first, as that's fair. I may revisit this if WT:DYK#Backlogs carries out its threat to time out nominations, but for now, please be patient. (Anyone else who wants a QPQ is free to review this in the interim.)--Launchballer 06:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of course, I completely comprehend. I just wanted to confirm that was all and ensure there was no other outstanding issues, thank you in advance for (hopefully) committing to reviewing this DYK. -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 02:39, 22 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment: Just from personal experience, I still think ALT0 is your best hook of the bunch above. Is there no way to find another reliable source for the claim? Note, as a fan of the show, a hook about the recasting of Harvey and Healy would be super interesting. It threw me and everyone who watched it for a loop when it aired. Viriditas (talk) 09:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Viriditas: Hey there! Thanks for responding. I also agree that ALT0 is my best hook, but unfortunately, the only direct claim is the NY Post interview. I also know that any secondary sources that report on the Cinnabon thing traces back to the NY Post thing, so that would be WP:FRUIT regardless. Perhaps the recast hook could work, it's something I considered early on, but I'm not sure how I would write it to be engaging to be quite honest. It's still not too late for me to go back and potentially edit my hook though is it? -Dcdiehardfan (talk) 04:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2024 College Football Playoff National Championship

(
)

5x expanded by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 01:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2024 College Football Playoff National Championship; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Oppose ALT1 or any hook describing the 1948 national championship as "consensus". Cited article states "first outright national championship since 1948" but ALT1 hook changes this to "...consensus...". On the topic of national championships, "consensus" has several meanings. One is agreement between the two wire service polls (AP Poll and Coaches Poll), which the 1997 title fails (AP only). But the 1948 title didn't have agreement between those polls either... the Coaches Poll started in 1950. Another meaning of "consensus", the one used in the NCAA records book, is any national championship after 1950 awarded by one or more of the Big 4 selectors (AP Trophy, Coaches' Trophy, Grantland Rice Award, and MacArthur Bowl). The 1997 title meets that criteria with 3/4 of the selectors; the 1948 title does not (as it is pre-1950). PK-WIKI (talk) 03:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

full review needed. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:05, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 13[edit]

Jade Armor

(
)

Created by BuySomeApples (talk). Self-nominated at 03:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jade Armor; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @BuySomeApples: New enough and long enough. QPQ present. Minor rewording of hook done to avoid ending on a preposition. Issues identified: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:26, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The Crimson Lord as a character is uncited.
    • The Señal News piece does not claim the martial artists were Wushu, only the stunt coordinator. These scenes were choreographed by Kung Fu stunt artists, all former French Kung Futeam members. This creates problems for the hook and the article text.
    • Nor is it claimed by either article that the stunts are the same ones used later. WP:SYNTH issue.

Jewish cemetery, Hoorn

(
)

Created by Drmies (talk). Self-nominated at 21:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jewish cemetery, Hoorn; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

M-Beat

(
)

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 13:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/M-Beat; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Do I understand it correctly that Junior Hart stated that he first met M-Beat by accident in 1989 and helped him because of being impressed by his drumming, while actually Junior Hart is M-Beat's father? (Just a question, I'm not planning to review the article yet.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 02:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not quite, Music Week asserted in its own words that that was how they met. I've been working on the principle that he disappeared for several years.--Launchballer 07:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Unlikely he had disappeared. He was about 13 in 1989. And he played in a school group. And according to the next section, he still lived with his parents at 21. (No, I'm not reviewing this.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 12:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right. Well, for any future reviewer, 'disappeared' was the wrong word, and I meant Junior in any case - he could very well have not found out Marlon was his until later.--Launchballer 12:50, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reviewer needed. Z1720 (talk) 02:27, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 14[edit]

Perihan Çınar

(
)

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 10:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Perihan Çınar; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • (Not a review) The hook is pretty boring, even if it were to be formatted to make it more idiomatic. Reading the article, I don't see anything more interesting. Please watch for typos; I corrected two just giving the page a quick glance. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:17, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chris Armstrong (political theorist)

(
)
  • ... that the British political theorist Chris Armstrong calls for a "blue new deal" to secure ecological resilience for the ocean and a just blue economy? Source: From this review of Armstrong's Blue New Deal: "He argues it is time to rethink our relationship with the ocean to foster a resilient environment and a just economy at sea."
    • Reviewed: TBD
    • Comment: I think the phrase "blue new deal" is a great one; I hope you agree!

Moved to mainspace by J Milburn (talk). Self-nominated at 18:46, 14 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Chris Armstrong (political theorist); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Comment: He is the author of several books, including 2017's Justice and Natural Resources and 2022's A Blue New Deal Is this a common format or style in the UK? I much prefer the readability of He is the author of several books, including Justice and Natural Resources (2017) and A Blue New Deal (2022) For some reason, dates with apostrophes look exceptionally strange on my screen. Not sure why. I tried to review this nom and got stuck at the dates. Heh. Viriditas (talk) 08:27, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Viriditas: Ok; I've phrased. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I just briefly read through the article and didn’t notice any problems, but I haven’t spot checked the sources just yet. I did notice that the bit about "Armstrong's central practical proposal is the need for a 'World Ocean Authority' to oversee the high seas" is very timely, and it’s a point I’ve heard come up again and again in any discussion about ocean resources. In fact, it’s very possible that I heard Armstrong himself discuss it a few months ago, I can’t recall, but I wonder if you might consider submitting an ALT1 along those lines. Also, would you consider submitting more than one QPQ to help with the backlog? I just submitted four for my last submission. I realize that’s asking a lot, but even two would help. Viriditas (talk) 09:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 15[edit]

Matt Stoller

(
)
  • ... that Matt Stoller believes that breaking up monopolies is “so central and so urgent that nearly any other cause or political relationship should be sacrificed in service of it”? Source: “ For many who knew Stoller or were familiar with his work, his boosting of Hawley was perhaps not surprising. Stoller is known for his dogmatic belief that taking on corporate power by breaking up companies that have gotten too big is the goal — so central and so urgent that nearly any other cause or political relationship should be sacrificed in service of it. His defense of Hawley, who had just a few years earlier become the first state attorney general to sue Google on antitrust grounds, was just the latest example.” Politico

Moved to mainspace by Thriley (talk). Self-nominated at 16:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Matt Stoller; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Hermann Collitz

(
)

5x expanded by Wugapodes (talk). Self-nominated at 04:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hermann Collitz; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

(alternative hook which I found interesting) ALT1: ... that the German linguist Hermann Collitz had studied four languages at school by the age of 13, in addition to two more he encountered at home? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 20[edit]

Jo-anne Wilkinson

(
)

Created by Panamitsu (talk). Self-nominated at 10:15, 23 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jo-anne Wilkinson; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment: Dingle wasn't knighted until 2017, and the leak occurred in 1992–1993, so he was just plain Graeme Dingle at the time of the incident on the Bering Sea. Paora (talk) 09:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Paora, I will keep that in mind in future. —Panamitsu (talk) 09:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wentworth-Bland flag

(
)
Electoral flag used by Wentworth and Bland
Electoral flag used by Wentworth and Bland

Created by Willthorpe (talk). Self-nominated at 05:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Wentworth-Bland flag; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment. This is less about the DYK eligibility, and I'm sure this is fine as an independent article, but... practically nothing in this article is about the flag. It's almost all about the background of the flag's creators and some events that happened contemporaneously with the flag's usage. The cited source, [34], doesn't even sound sure that the banner was used during the events discussed: "This banner was probably created for Australia’s first ‘national’ political elections held on 15 June 1843." (Of course, maybe they mean it was potentially created earlier.) A decent amount of the article seems like it'd really have a better home at 1843 New South Wales colonial election, and then prominently link that, perhaps? SnowFire (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • SnowFire The source further down has several mentions of the banner and the 1843 election, and the former's use during the latter. I previously cited two sources on this nomination. Cheers, Will Thorpe (talk) 06:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Fair enough. I'm... still not sure that this information isn't really better treated elsewhere, or that the statement in the lede that "The banner is notable for its role in early Australian electoral democracy" is fully supported by the text. Again, it's good content, it's great to be on Wikipedia somewhere, but with the exception of the "Legacy" section, it really seems like the article is actually about 1843 New South Wales colonial election, Sydney. The flag was present during these riots, sure, but I'm not sure it was really the focus - presumably the rioters ire was aimed at Wentworth and Bland personally, not merely their flag. (But yes, this is DYKN, not RM. But I'd consider refactoring or moving the article on the above grounds, or else having more content on the flag - the "Legacy" section has some, but it's just two sentences.) SnowFire (talk) 19:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 21[edit]

John Blair (surgeon)

(
)

Created by Whispyhistory (talk), Philafrenzy (talk), and Iainmacintyre (talk). Nominated by Whispyhistory (talk) at 09:18, 27 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/John Blair (surgeon); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Not a very interesting hook IMO. Can't you come up with anything better? Gatoclass (talk) 05:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A bit mean, but I agree. How about:
  • ALT1... that the Scottish surgeon John Blair received his degree in surgery for a thesis on the "Slipperiness of Human Fat"?
  • ALT2... that the Scottish surgeon John Blair was the only head boy at his school to receive his gold medal in the presence of his wife and child? (I think this was what Whispyhistory was actually getting at)
  • ALT3... that a shortage of gold meant that it was 60 years before the Scottish surgeon John Blair received his gold medal for being head boy at his school? (Whispyhistory to check the exact number of years) Philafrenzy (talk) 10:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, much better, thanks! I will return a little later to complete the review. Gatoclass (talk) 11:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually, "head boy" won't work because it differs from dux. Gatoclass (talk) 11:09, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Would "best student" be better? Whispyhistory (talk) 12:10, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Angelle (singer)

(
)

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 14:38, 21 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Angelle (singer); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 22[edit]

Walker Keith Baylor

(
)

Created by Aneirinn (talk). Self-nominated at 23:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Walker Keith Baylor; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Caspar Richter

(
)

Moved to mainspace by Thriley (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 21:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Caspar Richter; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • A nice little article but with some issues. It was obviously written by someone who does not speak English as their first language, and I cleaned up the prose somewhat. The opening section needs clarity over when things occurred (specific dates would be best, but even something more generic like "in his youth he studied...") There's nothing in the article to indicate how old he was and at what point in his life he was studying piano, working as a bar pianist, and studying in Hamburg (was he 10, 20 30, 40 y.o?) Also, the use of the German word Knabenkantorei is not clear to me; although I gather it is some type of choir. If it's a proper name of a specific ensemble that should be clarified. If it's a German word for a type of choir (a church choir?) then it would probably be better to describe the choir using English words only and remove the word Knabenkantorei entirely per WP:MOS. Other things that need fixing: the awards section lacks citations, no place of death is given, and most pressingly the use of the Friedrich Gulda School of Music website source (see here) is not appropriate. This is a self published non-independent source without an attributed author and should not be used as a reference as it can not be considered reliable (we would at least need an attributed author to determine if it was written by a subject matter expert in order to use a source like this per WP:SELFPUBLISHED). I would think there would be other news sources for much of this same content that could be located in independent secondary sources. I have placed tags where there are issues. Otherwise, the article is new enough, long enough, within policy, and the hook fact and length is verified. Once these issues are fixed please ping me.4meter4 (talk) 20:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    4meter4, I can't fix all - vacation - but found better sources:
    The article is basically a translation from German, with the normal issues. I guess we can forget already the original intention to have a DYK on his day of death, and may take some more time to improve. I'll be away and of limited use for another week. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These look like better refs. I understand that you need time. Ping me when updates have been completed. Enjoy your vacation Gerda.4meter4 (talk) 23:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm sorry that I still didn't have extra time. Subjects died, Seiji Ozawa ... - Thriley, can you add some of the above sources to the article? APA or Der Standard recommended if only one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem at all Gerda! I’ll tend to it soon. Thriley (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 23[edit]

Gasparilla Pirate Festival

(
)
Gasparilla Pirate Boat Float
Gasparilla Pirate Boat Float

Improved to Good Article status by Zeng8r (talk). Self-nominated at 20:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gasparilla Pirate Festival; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Tampa Bay Buccaneers pirate ship (for ALT2)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers pirate ship (for ALT2)
  • Zeng8r Recent GA (1-21-23) so the article qualifies for DYK. There are probably more hooks from sentences like this "Crowd size for the Parade of Pirates is typically about 300,000, making it one of the largest annual parades in the United States." I have trouble connecting all the events contained in ALT0. I cannot confirm that "leading citizens of Tampa, Florida dress up like pirates and hold a victory parade after invading the town in their pirate ship". So if you want that hook you will need to show me where those words appear in the article cited.
    The rest of the article is cited with references and it is neutral. No QPQ is required. The image is free and I do not find evidence of plagiarism in the article. I am surprised that a GA has so many citations in the lead see MOS:LEADCITE. The information is repeated in the article so I think that the lead citations are not needed. Pinging Viriditas as I came here from DYK talk at their urging. Bruxton (talk) 01:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment. I agree; good review. I hope Zeng8r finds time to respond. Viriditas (talk) 07:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see that this wasn't approved in time for yesterday's Gasparilla Day. Not sure why the original hook wasn't acceptable, as it's a one-sentence summary of the event that's paraphrased in pretty much every one of the 80+ article citations, but whatever. The suggested alternatives are fine and it's still Gasparilla season so it's not too late to make this a DYK item. ADDENDUM: Here's another idea: the Outbound Voyage is the culminating event of the Gasparilla Season and will take place on March 2 this year. The DYK hook could refer to that item and run on that date. Zeng8r (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There were too many moving parts to get this to the main page in a three day window. March 2 should work. see discussion Bruxton (talk) 21:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, thanks, I had not seen the primary discussion on this. Zeng8r (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I designed the hooks and the nominator approved but the hooks need a third editor to approve. Bruxton (talk) 22:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Leeds 2023

(
)
Leeds 2023's opening event
Leeds 2023's opening event

Created by Lajmmoore (talk). Self-nominated at 21:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Leeds 2023; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Claire Guichard

(
)

Created by Moondragon21 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:12, 23 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Claire Guichard; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Moondragon21: Based on DYKcheck: prose size fulfills criteria (2569 characters), article is recent enough. Suggest changing future to current in the hook.
    Suggestion
    ALT1:... that parliament member Claire Guichard once played in the miniseries Entre terre et mer? Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 23:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Jeromi Mikhael: Good idea, I support changing future to current for logical sense. Moondragon21 17:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 24[edit]

Demise and revival of compulsory figures

(
)
Sonja Morgenstern from Germany skates a compulsory figure, 1971
Sonja Morgenstern from Germany skates a compulsory figure, 1971

Created by Figureskatingfan (talk). Self-nominated at 23:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Demise and revival of compulsory figures; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

The hook still seems quite complicated and hard to read. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:42, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: let's do some cutting then. ALT4: ... that a revival of compulsory figures began in 2015, when the first World Figure Championships occurred in Lake Placid, New York? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Robert Brigandyne

(
)

Created by AntientNestor (talk). Self-nominated at 16:21, 24 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Robert Brigandyne; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Hook is uninteresting. Also, the phrase "[he] alone had charge of naval matters" needs attribution. Gatoclass (talk) 01:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The phrase "[he] alone had charge of naval matters" is a direct quote from the cited source, reference 7 at the time of posting. Now reformatted. Alt hook suggestions welcome.--AntientNestor (talk) 07:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ALT 1 hook: ... that Robert Brigandyne built the first dry dock in England because the new warships of King Henry VII grew too big to use the earlier method of repair of dragging them onto a mudbank? Source:Goldingham, C. S. (1918). "The Navy under Henry VII". The English Historical Review. 33 (132): 480. ISSN 0013-8266. --AntientNestor (talk) 07:46, 27 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1 is quite long and confusing. @Gatoclass: Do you have any suggestions on how to make the hook more concise or snappier? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That one's no good, it sounds like they were repairing mudbanks.
There is a wrinkle with ALT2 as well, in that, according to one source I found, there is evidence of a naturally occurring dry dock in England prior to this one, so I would suggest the hook is modified as follows:
*ALT4: ... that Robert Brigandyne constructed the first purpose-built dry dock in England, after the new warships of King Henry VII grew too big to repair on mudbanks? Gatoclass (talk) 18:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think we're getting somewhere now. Thanks. --AntientNestor (talk) 21:14, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Apologies for the delay in getting back to this. I have added a note about the natural dry dock that reportedly existed before this purpose-built dock. As I supplied ALT4, somebody else is now needed to verify it. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 06:47, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 25[edit]

Olivetti Valentine

(
)
Olivetti Valentine typewriter (1969)
Olivetti Valentine typewriter (1969)

Created by 842U (talk). Nominated by Cl3phact0 (talk) at 13:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Olivetti Valentine; 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
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: I agree that ALT1 is the preferable hook. Nice article, but there a couple of sourcing issues that need to be addressed: I have added one citation needed tag, and have tagged three unreliable sources (blogs and Tumblr) which should probably be removed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Comment: Thanks, AirshipJungleman29! I'll have a look at the tags (as I'd guess will 842U) and try to help resolve any sourcing issues. I've also struck out the first hook above for clarity, as ALT1 seems to be the preferred option. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 15:17, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: I've resolved 2 of the 3 unreliable sources and am wondering if we should somehow preserve the third, as it contains a photograph of Dieter Rams actually typing on his Valentine (or if not, whether it's possible to upload the image to Commons for posterity)? I'm also wondering if there's a better way to resolve the advertising spot references (most of which are on youtube) – perhaps a notelist that groups these together? -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1997 Spring Creek flood

(
)

Created by Tails Wx (talk). Self-nominated at 03:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/1997 Spring Creek flood; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 26[edit]

Georgetown football, 1874–1889

(
)

Created by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Georgetown football, 1874–1889; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Line of Duty (series 3)

(
)
  • ... that Jed Mercurio almost let "The Caddy" live? Source: [36] and [37] Quotes: "Dot’s escape was a bloody affair, and ended with him riddled with bullets, recording his dying declaration for Kate Fleming before passing away" and "Also, at the end of season 3, I seriously considered keeping the Caddy hidden from the rest of the team. Cottan came up with lots of plausible denial, framed Steve and continued within AC-12. But I knew people were desperate for justice."
    • ALT1: ... that Jed Mercurio almost let "The Caddy" live in series 3 of Line of Duty? Source: Same sources as above
    • Reviewed: N/A: First nomination
    • Comment: This is a work of fiction, but the fact considers real-world production information by sourcing a quote from the creator/writer. I believe that should allow it to pass DYKFICTION. I also came up with an alt hook In case the first would be considered an Easter Egg link. This is my first nomination, so I shouldn't need to review another article. I might also be able to try another alt if neither pass DYKFICTION.

5x expanded by TheDoctorWho (talk). Self-nominated at 04:53, 1 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Line of Duty (series 3); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Family 1

(
)
  • ... that Family 1, a closely related group of Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, place the story of the woman caught in adultery not in its usual place in the Gospel of John, but at the end of the book as a separate story? Source: Comfort, Philip Wesley (2017). A Commentary on Textual Additions to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregal Publications, pp. 83-84
    • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Stephen Walch (talk). Self-nominated at 16:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Family 1; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • ALT1 ... that Family 1, a closely related group of Greek New Testament manuscripts place the story of the woman caught in adultery at the end of the Gospel of John as a separate story? Source: Comfort, Philip Wesley (2017). A Commentary on Textual Additions to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregal Publications, pp. 83-84
  • That should be 175 characters. :)
  • Or even:
Let's go with the one that is 175 characters. Full review still needed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tapir!

(
)

Created by Suntooooth (talk). Self-nominated at 19:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Tapir!; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Raoul Augereau

(
)

Created by Lettler (talk). Self-nominated at 16:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Raoul Augereau; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 27[edit]

San Rafael Falls

(
)

5x expanded by Shannon1 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/San Rafael Falls; 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: No - Article says that the waterfall retreated upstream and disappeared over a few months, rather than just in February. A direct citation is also needed (the mention in the lead is ideal for hook eligibility).
  • Interesting: Yes

QPQ: No - Pending
Overall: An interesting and tragic article; I would like to see the hook issue cleared up, but otherwise the article looks great. SounderBruce 05:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Shannon1: Can you please confirm how many DYK nominations you have so far? If it's more than five, you need to provide a QPQ for this nomination to proceed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Per the new tool I can confirm that Shannon1 has less than five nominations and thus does not need to do a QPQ. However, Shannon1 is currently on Wikibreak, so unless they return soon and address the issues, the nomination may have to be closed. Given that their userpage indicates a short wikibreak, the nomination may be marked for closure if there is no response or activity by the 22nd (one week after this comment). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:25, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tidy Trax

(
)

Created by ResonantDistortion (talk). Self-nominated at 10:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Tidy Trax; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Hiss (song)

(
)

Created by BeyPolite (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 19:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hiss (song); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • That's much longer, and I think the law's name being the same as the rapper adds to both catchiness and interestingness.--NØ 07:15, 31 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sodankylä Old Church

(
)
The Sodankylä Old Church in 2019
The Sodankylä Old Church in 2019

Created by Juustila (talk). Self-nominated at 18:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sodankylä Old Church; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Starting the review now. Updates to follow. Ktin (talk) 04:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


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

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Unknown
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - Note below.
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Article meets eligibility criteria. New. Long enough. No concerns with Earwig nor with tone. Some amount of copy edits might be required. Will note them below. Image is a nice one. Image seems to have been uploaded as "own work" with geo-location enabled. So, no concerns there. QPQ not needed. Ktin (talk) 04:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Hook
    • Hook says that the church is "one of Finland's oldest and well preserved wooden churches". The source however says [the church] ... is one of Finland’s oldest preserved wooden churches. So, basis this source, the first part of the hook is quoted and the latter part (i.e. "well preserved") is a subjective opinion that is not born by the quote. Furthermore, when we say the statement in the latter part of the hook, we should quote it to a source that is independent. Currently, the source links to the city's tourism website if I understand it correct -- that might not be the best source.
    • Consider retaining the first part and remove the subjectivity in the second part unless we are able to source it to a reliable independent source. e.g. "the church is one of the oldest preserved wooden churches"

Article feedback below. The article is largely good with some improvement feedback below.

  • Lede
    • "The church is considered one of the best preserved wooden churches in Finland" -- According to whom? Can we tie that statement to Finnish Heritage Agency? If so, this can be a compelling statement. However, if we are saying "According to Visit Lapland, the church is considered one of the best preserved wooden churches in Finland," that might not be compelling enough
  • History
    • Some amount of copyediting might be required here across the section.
    • You could start with when construction began and when it was completed, rather than starting with when construction was completed and then coming back three sentences later to say when construction might have started.
    • "Valuable persons" -- consider rewording this phrase. Prominent people? Consider adding a few examples of these prominent people
    • "is best preserved as a mummy" -- reword this phrase
    • "renovated again in 1979–1980 and 1992–1995" -- if you are giving a range of dates consider using "between" instead of "in"
  • Structure
    • "Medieval tradition" -- is there further qualification that can be added here? e.g. Medieval tradition of xxx
    • "Exceptional way" -- I do not know the architectural concepts here, but, are we trying to say the planking is different from normal rafter structure. If so, consider rewording
  • Other Notes
    • Can we add any notes on what the church is used for currently? The Visit Sodankyla website says it is not open for visitors currently.[1] Any details that you can add?

Handing this back to the nominator. Ktin (talk) 04:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Sodankylä Old Church". Visit Sodankylä. 2023-01-10. Retrieved 2024-02-04.
@Juustila: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 02:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ktin: Does the above address your concerns? Z1720 (talk) 18:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Thanks for the nudge @Z1720:. I made a few copyedits on the article. I am going to make a minor edit to the hook.
If this is alright, I will go ahead and mark this approved. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 01:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bow Lake (SeaTac, Washington)

(
)

Created by DirtyHarry991 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bow Lake (SeaTac, Washington); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 28[edit]

Intermission (Hopper)

(
)

Created by Viriditas (talk) and Tryptofish (talk). Nominated by Viriditas (talk) at 21:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Intermission (Hopper); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment to Viriditas: thanks for providing so many QPQs! Most of them check out, but No Rome is not a full review as required by a QPQ guidelines, so I've struck it. I'm shaky on Weaponization of antisemitism, as it's also not a full-review, but given the depth of the quickfail, I'm inclined to say that's okay. Good luck with this nom, looks great! :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Looks to me like Bogger holds both credits for doing both reviews, in case they don't know that they're entitled to use that nom a second time :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 00:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @Theleekycauldron: Thank you. I completely missed that. Viriditas (talk) 01:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I updated it with a third hook. Will update with a fourth shortly. I removed the other two since it still shows up in what links here and that could throw people off. Viriditas (talk) 00:22, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kenneth Raisbeck

(
)

Created by 4meter4 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kenneth Raisbeck; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • This is not a full review, but I have some reservations about the hook. If a reader is unfamiliar with Wolfe or his novel, the hook doesn't really stand out, making the hook somewhat reliant on specialist knowledge. Can a more broadly understandable hook be proposed here? Although morbid, I wonder if a hook regarding the dispute regarding the circumstances of his death could work. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @4meter4: I was asking for some feedback off-Wiki regarding this nom and Pretzelles offered this alternative wording:
ALT1 ... that despite falling out with its author, Kenneth Raisbeck was the basis for a character in the novel Of Time and the River?
Personally I think it's better than the original hook since it's less reliant on specialist knowledge. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:09, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5 I am fine with the alternative hook provided Wolfe is named in the text. I don't necessarily think specialist knowledge is needed. Thomas Wolfe is a major American novelist. He was required reading when I went to high school (I read Look Homeward Angel in 11th grade English) and college (I read 'Of Time and the River in freshman English lit). It would be like not knowing who Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Edgar Alan Poe, or Mark Twain are when it comes to American Lit. It would be rare to take a course in classic American lit in high school or college without reading Thomas Wolfe. He's a central writer, and is not exactly an esoteric topic. There is a whole slew of CliffsNotes and other study materials made for high school and college students for the novel Of Time and the River because it is a regularly assigned novel in English lit courses. The typical American will have studied Wolfe in school. I suppose global audience may not be as familiar with Wolfe, but certainly he is read in the UK. The Brits made a 2016 biopic film Genius which is about the writing of Of Time and the River so its not like this novel hasn't been in the broader public consciousness recently. I would oppose not including Wolfe's name in the hook because Wolfe's name is the immediate draw that make's it hooky in the same way other famous novelists like Twain, Poe, Dickens, Austen, etc. would be a draw. And yes Wolfe is in that class of major well known novelist (which is why we have things like biopic films being made on him). 4meter4 (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose global audience may not be as familiar with Wolfe. This is really the issue here. Per WP:DYKINT: don't assume everyone worldwide is familiar with your subject. What we could do, as a compromise, could be ALT1a ... that despite falling out with its author, Kenneth Raisbeck was the basis for a character in the Thomas Wolfe novel Of Time and the River?, but it should still be noted that hooks should not be US centric (maybe it's me not being an American, but I have never heard of Wolfe before though I know who Twain, Poe, and Dickens are, and I imagine they're far more well-known internationally). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:01, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agreed. One can't always know if something is US centric if you are yourself American and lack an outsiders perspective. I think the alt hook with the addition of Wolfe's name would be fine.4meter4 (talk) 01:07, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Umrao Singh Sher-Gil

(
)

5x expanded by Ktin (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Ktin (talk) at 07:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Umrao Singh Sher-Gil; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on January 29[edit]

Sukadji Hendrotomo

(
)

Created by Jeromi Mikhael (talk). Self-nominated at 23:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sukadji Hendrotomo; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Andrew Carnegie Mansion

(
)
The Andrew Carnegie Mansion
The Andrew Carnegie Mansion

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 15:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Andrew Carnegie Mansion; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • @Epicgenius: 5x expanded and long enough. Comprehensive article and Earwig is 27% and only alerts to titles. QPQ is done and article is referenced, cited correctly and neutral. The image is free and renders well at this size. Under Site In a spot check of citations I am unable to confirm the 1902 date in this sentence "the mansion was near the north end of Fifth Avenue's Millionaires' Row when it was finished in 1902". I spot checked twenty other citations that matched.
  1. AlT0 slight inconsistency - the source says begged for "the" job, but our hook says "a" job.
  2. ALT1 states several doorways were shortened but we only list one shortened doorway in our article "The doorway to the office was only 6 feet (1.8 m) high"
I prefer those hooks if we can correct them and make them line up with our article. Bruxton (talk) 04:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Epicgenius: I see you corrected the 1902 issue Special:Diff/1202352925, and I will adjust the hooks above. Let me know if they are a good interpretation of the sources.
  • ALT0a: ... that the Andrew Carnegie Mansion in New York City was designed by "the only architects in the city who had not begged for the job"? Source: Ewing, Heather P. (2014). Life of a Mansion: the Story of Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum. Cooper Hewitt. pp. 20, 23.
  • ALT1a: ... that a doorway in the Andrew Carnegie Mansion was shortened to draw attention away from Carnegie's short stature? Bruxton (talk) 18:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Bruxton: Thanks for the review. I have no problem with the content of these hooks, though they will need a third editor to look at them, so I will mark these hooks as needing review. Epicgenius (talk) 18:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Epicgenius: If you had corrected them first.... it is my fault for being too quick. Good article EG and I am excited to review this as a GAN. Bruxton (talk) 19:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mosque of Ulmas al-Hajib

(
)
Muqarnas vault at the Mosque of Ulmas al-Hajib
Muqarnas vault at the Mosque of Ulmas al-Hajib
  • ... that the Mosque of Ulmas al-Hajib has the first "flat" muqarnas vault (pictured) in Cairo? Sources: 1) O'Kane, Bernard (2016). The Mosques of Egypt. American University of Cairo Press, p.92: "The portal itself is also the first to be vaulted with an array of flat muqarnas, paralleled later in the Mosque of Bashtak."; 2) Behrens-Abouseif, Doris (2007). Cairo of the Mamluks: A History of Architecture and its Culture. The American University in Cairo Press, p. 182: "The portal consists of a deep recess roofed with a flat stone muqarnas, which was a novelty in Cairo that was repeated twice later, [...]"

Created by R Prazeres (talk). Self-nominated at 06:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mosque of Ulmas al-Hajib; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on January 30[edit]

Articles created/expanded on January 31[edit]

Head Harbour Lighthouse

(
)
East Quoddy Head Light, a.k.a. Head Harbour Lighthouse
East Quoddy Head Light, a.k.a. Head Harbour Lighthouse
  • ... that there's an East Quoddy Head Lighthouse (pictured) and a West Quoddy Head Lighthouse across the bay from one another (in matching colors!) but that one is in Canada and the other is in the United States? Source: https://www.lighthousefriends.com/light.asp?ID=1022
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: East Quoddy and West Quoddy are an adorable pair of lighthouses in the Bay of Fundy between Maine, USA and New Brunswick, Canada. They're both painted a bright red and white, (with America's in patriotic stripes and Canada's with a classic St. George's Cross,) and are just a delightful twin site. I noticed there wasn't an article for East Quoddy (a.k.a. Head Harbour Light), so I wrote one up and am submitting this now, hopefully you like it!

Created by Garnet Moss (talk). Self-nominated at 03:32, 4 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Head Harbour Lighthouse; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I'm not sure this qualifies as a reliable source, it appears to be the self-published work of an amateur. nableezy - 16:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It's a thorough, secondary source for information about many lighthouses, which further cites primary sources. I'm happy to submit other links to more authoritative sources, but I chose this one because it included info about both East and West Quoddy in the same body of text, so it seemed most relevant. (Also, sorry if this is bad protocol, this is my first DYK!) Garnet Moss (talk) 23:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is secondary sure, but it is self-published and I dont see anything indicating the author has academic works on the topic to make it a usable self-published source. So yes, please do include some other source for the statement. Thanks, nableezy - 14:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Sure thing; I'll note the "statement" is essentially just that this pair of lighthouses exists on the bay. If a simple tourism page would work, there's this one from the New Brunswick tourism department's website, noting that the lighthouse is twinned with West Quoddy. If something more 'serious' would be preferred, I'd have to cite a pair of pages, like this one from the official Canadian Register of Historic Places website, in conjunction with this one from the offician American National Register of Historic Places website. These don't reference one another, but they site the location in the same bay. Hopefully one of these options would work! Garnet Moss (talk) 03:29, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Im sorry, maybe I just dont have enough background here, but the tourism site just says It is the older sister light of West Quoddy Light in Lubec, Maine. It doesn't support the matching colors, which I know you can see from photos, but I dont know if this really rises to supported by a reliable source for the hook. nableezy - 16:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Five-Pavilion Bridge

(
)
The Five-Pavilion Bridge in Yangzhou
The Five-Pavilion Bridge in Yangzhou
  • ... that Yangzhou's Five-Pavilion Bridge (pictured) was built by salt merchants to welcome the Qianlong Emperor? Source: Chen Shouxiang; et al. (2022), "Architecture of the Qing Dynasty", A General History of Chinese Art, vol. VI, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, p. 389.

    Olivová, Lucie B. (2009), "Building History and the Preservation of Yangzhou", Lifestyle and Entertainment in Yangzhou, NIAS Studies in Asian Topics, No. 44, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, p. 9.
    • ALT1: ... that Yangzhou's Five-Pavilion Bridge (pictured) has been reckoned China's most artistic and elegant bridge? Source: "Five-Pavilion Bridge", Official site, Yangzhou: Slender West Lake Scenic Spot, 2023.
    • ALT2: ... that the Five-Pavilion Bridge's (pictured) pavilions were destroyed by the Taiping Heavenly Army but subsequently rebuilt? Source: Chen Lifang; et al. (1986), The Garden Art of China, Portland: Timber Press, p. 23.

      Olivová, Lucie B. (2009), "Building History and the Preservation of Yangzhou", Lifestyle and Entertainment in Yangzhou, NIAS Studies in Asian Topics, No. 44, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, p. 17.
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mystic, South Dakota
    • Comment: Kindly do not add any links to the hooks. DYK exists to promote the newly improved articles, and the curious can click through to any others.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 17:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Five-Pavilion Bridge; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Herwig Gössl

(
)

Created by Modussiccandi (talk). Self-nominated at 10:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Herwig Gössl; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 1[edit]

Hindu Mela

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Sohom Datta (talk). Self-nominated at 20:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hindu Mela; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 2[edit]

Itutumba Ka ng Tatay Ko

(
)

Created by RapMonstaXY (talk). Self-nominated at 13:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Itutumba Ka ng Tatay Ko; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Even as someone familiar with Gibbs, the hook probably won't appeal to those outside the Philippines, so a new hook is probably needed here. Maybe a hook about the connection with his late father would be better? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, that sounds okay. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:41, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The article was new enough and long enough at the time of the nomination and is free of close paraphrasing. ALT1 is cited inline and verified in the source. No QPQ has been given, please confirm if you have over five nominations, because if this is the case then you will need to provide a QPQ for this nomination to proceed. I think the Production section could use some copyediting. Once these issues are addressed the nomination will be approved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alfred de Laage de Meux

(
)
De Meux, ca. 1915–1917
De Meux, ca. 1915–1917

Created by Tails Wx (talk). Self-nominated at 15:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Alfred de Laage de Meux; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 3[edit]

Sean Jackson (basketball)

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 05:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sean Jackson (basketball); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

This is a peculiar date request. I was initially going to request this run on the date that Princeton's postseason game is to occur. However, it is looking like Princeton will not appear in either the 2024 NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament or 2024 National Invitation Tournament. As a result, I will tentatively request March 16 to coincide with the 2024 Ivy League men's basketball tournament. But I would like to reserve the right to reevaluate the prospect following the games of March 2nd to say whether I would like to change to betting on a later date.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Brandon Coleman (offensive lineman)

(
)

Created by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Brandon Coleman (offensive lineman); 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: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: No - Conversion should be added (i.e. 18 mph (29 km/h))
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article was new when DYK was submitted and is long enough. Source checks out, no plagiarism detected with Earwig. Hook is good, but convert should be added for MPH. grungaloo (talk) 17:13, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ali Ahmed Karti

(
)

5x expanded by Crispulop (talk). Self-nominated at 17:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ali Ahmed Karti; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Fursan al-Aqsa: The Knights of the Al-Aqsa Mosque

(
)

Created by BuySomeApples (talk) and Thisisarealusername (talk). Nominated by BuySomeApples (talk) at 05:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Fursan al-Aqsa: The Knights of the Al-Aqsa Mosque; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment The article may not be notable at all, violating the notability requirement of WP:DYK, as it uses several unreliable sources, including Hooked Gamers, one of the sites that reviewed the game. Additionally, even if it were notable, if all a game is known for is a controversy, then the controversy itself would be notable rather than the game. There are also some WP:UNDUE issues with the writing, as the article describes the perpetrators as "freedom fighters" without clarifying it is a fringe viewpoint. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I tweaked the dev's quotes to fix the UNDUE concerns, but I'm pretty sure this meets notability requirements. We have Haaretz, Jerusalem Post and Ynet articles about it, and some games do become notable mostly because of controversy. I don't think having a standalone page about the controversy would be better than the current page. Hooked Gamers wouldn't be enough to meet notability requirements on its own, but it seems reliable enough to include (it seems to have editorial standards and Metacritic counts it). BuySomeApples (talk) 02:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Metacritic counts numerous websites that are considered (by Wikipedia) to be unreliable. It does have metrics where it counts smaller sites less, but we don't have said metrics, it's all or nothing. Hooked Gamers blatantly states they are "volunteer-run" and it does not mention editors, only contributors. It is clear that they are not experts, I don't see why they should be taken any more seriously than someone's blog. It's not mentioned in WP:VG/S, but if it were it would likely be strictly in the unreliable column.
The reason why a solely controversial game cannot be encyclopedic in the absence of reviews is that WP:INDISCRIMINATE requires something to demonstrate its "development, design, reception, significance, and influence". Said game would have no influence, and would fall under WP:NOT. Having influence is demonstrated by some kind of commentary on the substance of the game and not just its broad themes. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you really have a problem with Hooked Gamers, the source can be removed but it's by far not the only or best ref supporting the article. Take the page to AfD if you're still worried about notability, it's the only way to get consensus. BuySomeApples (talk) 06:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mary Lake Polan

(
)

Created by Silver seren (talk). Self-nominated at 19:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mary Lake Polan; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Lianxing Temple

(
)
  • ... that the White Dagoba at the Lianxing Temple in Yangzhou was not built by Iranian nomads 1000 years ago? Source: Snow, Edgar; et al. (10 August 1929), "Journeying through Kiangsu: From Shanghai to the Capital via the Shanghai Nanking Railway", China Weekly Review, vol. XLIX, Shanghai: Millard Publishing Co., p. 568, for the fact that some people used to believe that. Every other source in the article and world for the fact that it's wrong.
    • ALT1: ... that the White Dagoba at the Lianxing Temple in Yangzhou was probably not originally made of an enormous pile of salt? Source: Morris, Edwin T. (1983), The Gardens of China: History, Art, and Meanings, New York: Scribner, p. 122, for the fact that it's a traditional story in China. "White Pagoda", Official site, Yangzhou: Slender West Lake Scenic Spot, 2023, for it probably being wrong in the opinion of the site's caretakers and official historians.
    • ALT2: ... that the Taiping rebels destroyed most of Yangzhou's Lianxing Temple but left its White Dagoba alone so it could be used as a watchtower? Source: Olivová, Lucie B. (2009), "Building History and the Preservation of Yangzhou", Lifestyle and Entertainment in Yangzhou, NIAS Studies in Asian Topics, No. 44, Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies, p. 17.
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Barley
    • Comment: Kindly do not add extraneous links to the hooks. DYK is here to promote the newly created articles and readers can click through if interested.

Created by LlywelynII (talk). Self-nominated at 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lianxing Temple; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 4[edit]

Paleoallium

(
)
Paleoallium billgenseli scape and floretes
Paleoallium billgenseli scape and floretes
  • ... that propagation in the fossil amaryllis relative Paleoallium (pictured) may have been with floods or pollinators? Source: Pigg, Bryan, & DeVore 2018 "Why Produce a Combination of Bulbils and Flowers? paragraphs 2 & 3"
    • ALT1: ... that while named for alliums, the fossil Paleoallium (pictured) was not specifically named as directly related to any allium species? Source: Pigg, Bryan, & DeVore 2018 "Establishment of New Taxon: For our model, we illustrate Allium cepa var. proliferum, known as the Egyptian walking onion (figs. 1I, 2E, 3A, 4F); however, we do not imply a direct relationship to this or another particular modern species."
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Crassispira incrassata

Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 03:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Paleoallium; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 5[edit]

Allenbya collinsonae

(
)
  • ... that only one fruit but several thousand seeds were known when Allenbya collinsonae was named? Source: Cevallos-Ferriz and Stockey 1989 page 207 "Material and methods" "One fruit and several thousand seeds have been found in chert blocks near Princeton, British Columbia. These seeds are some of the most common fossils in the chert."
    • ALT1: ... that Allenbya collinsonae waterlily seeds are some of the most common Princeton Chert fossils? Source: Cevallos-Ferriz and Stockey 1989 page 207 "Material and methods" "One fruit and several thousand seeds have been found in chert blocks near Princeton, British Columbia. These seeds are some of the most common fossils in the chert."
    • ALT2: ... that the waterlily Allenbya is named for the same ghost town as a rock formation? Source: Cevallos-Ferriz and Stockey 1989 page 208 ETYMOLOGY. The genus is named after the abandoned mining town of Allenby from which the Allenby Formation also takes its name
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ephelcomenus
    • Comment: Article started by @Conan Wolff: on 5 February 2024, expanded by Kevmin from there

Created by Kevmin (talk) and Conan Wolff (talk). Nominated by Kevmin (talk) at 20:18, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Allenbya collinsonae; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Potiki

(
)
  • ... that despite the novel Potiki being about the impact of land development on an indigenous community, author Patricia Grace did not mean for it to be seen as political? Source: [40] "The book was described as political. I suppose it was but I didn’t realise it. The land issues and language issues were what Māori people lived with every day and still do. It was just everyday life to us, and the ordinary lives of ordinary people was what I wanted to write about, so I didn’t expect the angry reaction from some quarters."

Improved to Good Article status by Chocmilk03 (talk). Self-nominated at 22:13, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Potiki; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Dave Jamerson

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 21:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Dave Jamerson; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

There's a "citation needed" tag in the article that needs addressing. Gatoclass (talk) 11:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cn tag has been resolved. Z1720 (talk) 18:47, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paula Arai

(
)

Created by Figureskatingfan (talk). Self-nominated at 21:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Paula Arai; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Porij

(
)

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 11:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Porij; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

"Cuts their parts" is puzzling and sounds like self-harming or something. Suggest you rephrase that. Gatoclass (talk) 01:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was my understanding that 'cut' meant the same as 'record'. ALT3: ... that the members of the British band Porij record their parts in their bedrooms?--Launchballer 19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, a few issues. Firstly, ALTs 1 and 3 won't work because the source dates to 2020 and we don't know if they still record their parts in their bedrooms, secondly, I really like ALT2 and if I had my druthers would run it as is, but it has two issues, firstly that all sources but one appear to refer to the singer as "Eggy" rather than "Egg", and secondly it may attract the MOS police because of the lack of capitalization; and thirdly, the original hook is not very interesting. Any chance of coming up with a different hook or two? Gatoclass (talk) 08:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Egg appears to be Moore's most recent stage name per their record label (and umpteen rewritten press releases such as NME, Line of Best Fit, Stereogum), is the name used when remixing per Spotify, and is the name they use on their own Facebook account; my guess is that their stage name began as Eggy and then found itself shortened. (It's a crying shame their first EP Breakfast doesn't meet notability guidelines.)
ALT4: ... that Porij called their record label Oat Gang because DistroKid wanted a label name? (Source: https://diymag.com/interview/porij-baby-face-ep-august-2021-interview)
ALT5: ... that the lead singer of Porij uses they/them pronouns? (Source: https://www.nme.com/features/music-interviews/porij-band-manchester-interview-outlines-live-radar-3307357)
ALT6: ... that Piri pilfered Porij's guitarist for her own band after matching with him on Tinder? (Source: per ALT5, plus https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/piri-and-tommy-meet-the-rising-stars-of-pop-xbsjrwl8t for Tinder)
There's probably a really quirky hook in ALT6 involving lots and lots of alliteration ("plank-spanker" is a synonym for guitarist per NME and, well, Piri's other activities...), but I need to head out.--Launchballer 10:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Billy Fitzgerald (lacrosse)

(
)

Created by Giants2008 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Billy Fitzgerald (lacrosse); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

ALT0 is incorrect (he was voted second best Canadian player) and excessively wordy. Suggested alt:

  • ALT1: ... that a journalists' poll rated Billy Fitzgerald the second best Canadian lacrosse player of the first half of the 20th century? Gatoclass (talk) 09:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Can't believe I missed that in the source. Thanks for the catch; it's been fixed in the article now. ALT1 definitely looks better than the first blurb. Giants2008 (Talk) 02:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 6[edit]

Cicely Hilda Farmer

(
)

Created by Edwardx (talk). Self-nominated at 23:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Cicely Hilda Farmer; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Salar del Huasco

(
)
Salar del Huasco
Salar del Huasco

5x expanded by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 12:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Salar del Huasco; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Is This Band Emo?

(
)

Created by PantheonRadiance (talk). Self-nominated at 01:00, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Is This Band Emo?; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Juniperus scopulorum

(
)

5x expanded by MtBotany (talk). Self-nominated at 18:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Juniperus scopulorum; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ Phillips, Frank J. (1910). "The Dissemination of Junipers by Birds". Forestry Quarterly. Cambridge, Massachusetts. 8: 62. Retrieved 6 February 2024.
  2. ^ Arno, Stephen F. (1977). Northwest trees. Seattle, Washington: Mountaineers. p. 134. ISBN 978-0-916890-50-6. Retrieved 7 February 2024.
  3. ^ Olsen, Mary; Young, Deborah. "True Mistletoes" (PDF). University of Arizona Cooperative Extension. Department of Plant Sciences, University of Arizona. Retrieved 5 February 2024.

Run (meme)

(
)

Created by PetraMagna (talk). Nominated by BuySomeApples (talk) at 05:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Run (meme); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Article is new enough and long enough. What makes this a reliable source? Where does #9 say that the meme had an enthusiastic reception? Gonna wonder if the Chinese government had anything to say (or do) about this thing. Didn't notice any copyvio or plagiarism. I'd go for ALT1. QPQ seems OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The site claims that they are established by Hong Kong University's Journalism and Media Studies Centre. I found confirmation of that claim on JMSC's site. There are older archives such as [41] and [42] whose domain name indicate that the project was a part of Hong Kong University. My speculation is that China Media Project became independent from Hong Kong University at some point, changed their domain, and moved to the US and Taiwan, which is not surprising considering the fate of other news services in Hong Kong (those are my guesses, though). An article from the Guardian quoted the director (Bandurski) in 2019 and stated that CMP is affiliated with HKU. I can keep digging for other sources, but I think this is good enough for establishing credibility. Bandurski is still the director and wrote the source quoted in the article, at least according to the China Media Project site, and I don't see indications of the site becoming an inferior source after becoming independent from HKU.
The "enthusiastic reception" sentence might be an extrapolation on my part. I will look around the source to see what made me think that and rewrite it if I can't find anything. As for governmental responses, I remember seeing some sources speculate that the term was invented to circumvent censorship, and search engines were preventing users from accessing internet search trends because of spikes in emigration-related queries. I can expand it in this respect in the next few days when I'm available. PetraMagna (talk) 17:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Most of the content concerns have been addressed. As for censorship, I added that the term was created to circumvent censorship. I don't believe the term is censored in China as of now, though I can still add censorship of immigration-related search result later. One remaining issue with the article is that the sections seem to blend together to me. Perhaps there's a way to better organize the article. PetraMagna (talk) 08:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of accolades received by The Last of Us (TV series)

(
)

Created by ZooBlazer (talk) and Rhain (talk). Nominated by ZooBlazer (talk) at 05:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/List of accolades received by The Last of Us (TV series); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Gorontalo (city)

(
)

Created by Nyanardsan (talk). Self-nominated at 14:38, 6 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gorontalo (city); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

R. Ames Montgomery

(
)
Montgomery c. 1924
Montgomery c. 1924

Moved to mainspace by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 05:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/R. Ames Montgomery; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on February 7[edit]

Oakwood Cemetery (Montgomery, Alabama)

(
)

Created by Drmies (talk) and Uncle G (talk). Nominated by Drmies (talk) at 23:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Oakwood Cemetery (Montgomery, Alabama); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Elmwood Tower

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Etriusus (talk). Self-nominated at 04:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Elmwood Tower; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Comets in fiction

(
)
Halley's Comet
Halley's Comet

Improved to Good Article status by TompaDompa (talk). Self-nominated at 21:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Comets in fiction; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 8[edit]

Jumalan teatteri

(
)

Created by JIP (talk). Self-nominated at 11:24, 11 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jumalan teatteri; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Canada All-Stars

(
)

Moved to mainspace by BeanieFan11 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Canada All-Stars; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Only God Was Above Us

(
)

Created by Pelekalikimaka (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 16:09, 9 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Only God Was Above Us; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

PHerc. Paris. 4

(
)
  • ... that it took a particle accelerator and machine-learning algorithms to extract the charred text of PHerc. Paris. 4 without unrolling it? Source: First passages of rolled-up Herculaneum scroll revealed [43]

Created by NeverBeGameOver (talk), Ifly6 (talk), and StarTrekker (talk). Nominated by NeverBeGameOver (talk) at 05:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/PHerc. Paris. 4; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I would not use the first one related to Nat Friedman. It sounds too much like an endorsement or promotion thereof. The second, noting the discovery of a work by Philodemus, is reasonable and is sourced reliably (Nature). Ifly6 (talk) 05:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Songs from Suicide Bridge

(
)
Colorado Street Bridge in Pasadena, California
Colorado Street Bridge in Pasadena, California

Created by DigitalIceAge (talk). Self-nominated at 18:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Songs from Suicide Bridge; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Beebo the God of War

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by OlifanofmrTennant (talk) and Kailash29792 (talk). Nominated by OlifanofmrTennant (talk) at 05:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Beebo the God of War; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • This isn't a review but a comment, but I would suggest dropping ALT1 per WP:DYKFICTION (a hook about a work of fiction has to be primarily about the real world), and also because it seems very specialist and may not appeal to non-fans. Personally I think ALT2 is the best hook among the three proposals but I will let the reviewer decide. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 9[edit]

Weird Faith

(
)

Created by Voorts (talk). Self-nominated at 01:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Weird Faith; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Art of the Jewish people

(
)
  • ... that following the emancipation, there was a rise in Jews engaging with the arts leading to a cultural resurgence in Jewish culture and art in the Europe? Source: https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/painting_and_sculpture
    • ALT1: ... that following the Russian revolution, Jews were emancipated and free to engage in the arts leading to a resurgence in Jewish art? Source: Rebecca Assoun, Jewish artists in Montparnasse Archived September 29, 2007, at the Wayback Machine. European Jewish Press, July 19, 2005. Accessed February 12, 2006.
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: Link to article can be in:" Jewish culture and art " and in ALT1 in "Jewish art"

Created by Homerethegreat (talk). Self-nominated at 10:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Art of the Jewish people; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Ancient Jewish art

(
)
  • ... that ancient Jewish art in late antiquity is epitomized by the biblical themed murals of the Dura-Europos synagogue in Syria? Source: Rachel, Hachlili (1998). Ancient jewish art and archaeology in the diaspora. Brill. ISBN 978-9004108783. OCLC 470279305. https://search.worldcat.org/title/470279305
    • Reviewed:

Created by Homerethegreat (talk). Self-nominated at 19:22, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ancient Jewish art; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

All's Well That Ends Well (iZombie)

(
)

Created by OlifanofmrTennant (talk). Self-nominated at 02:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/All's Well That Ends Well; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Eretnid dynasty

(
)
Silver dirham minted in the name of Eretna in 1351 in Erzincan. It includes an inscription in the Uyghur script that reads sultan adil.
Silver dirham minted in the name of Eretna in 1351 in Erzincan. It includes an inscription in the Uyghur script that reads sultan adil.

Improved to Good Article status by Aintabli (talk). Self-nominated at 19:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Eretnid dynasty; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Battle of Carrizo

(
)

Created by Lbal (talk). Self-nominated at 18:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Battle of Carrizo; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Pantheon ad Lucem

(
)

Created by Premeditated Chaos (talk). Self-nominated at 16:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Pantheon ad Lucem; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

2024 Netball Nations Cup

(
)

Created by Djln19 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2024 Netball Nations Cup; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Hello, @Djln19: The first things I've noticed is that the article is not long enough for DYK. But this is easily fixed by converting the list under "Debuts and milestones" into prose form. I will begin my full review shortly. ~~lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 17:15, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sources should be given for the match officials' associations. In addition to prosifying the milestones as above, basic organizational information should be summarized in the lead, such as The group stage consists of three rounds, the first two of which were held 20-21 Jan in OVO, London; and the third one, playoffs, and grand final were held 27-28 Jan in the First Direct Arena, Leeds. In the hook, "for New Zealand in the same team" sounds a little redundant, would it be possible to cut it down to
    ALT1: ... that at the 2024 Netball Nations Cup, Georgia and Kate Heffernan became the first sisters to play for New Zealand at the same time?
  • Article: new enough, neutral, BLP-compliant, copyvio-free according to Earwig, complete and presentable; Hook: cited, interesting, QPQ not required. Best wishes, ~~lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 20:21, 16 February 2024 (UTC); edited 16:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Silver Ferns fall to Australian Diamonds in Nations Cup opener". stuff.co.nz. 22 January 2024. Retrieved 30 January 2024.
  2. ^ "Australia defeat Silver Ferns in Nations Cup opener". www.silverferns.co.nz. 21 January 2024. Retrieved 27 January 2024.
  3. ^ "Steel's Heffernan makes Silver Ferns debut as team's preparations begin". stuff.co.nz. 22 January 2024. Retrieved 28 January 2024.
  4. ^ "Newest Silver Fern shocked by call-up against world champs". www.rnz.co.nz. 25 January 2024. Retrieved 27 January 2024.

May O'Flaherty

(
)

Created by Bogger (talk). Self-nominated at 14:25, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/May O'Flaherty; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


{{subst:DYK top|passed=yes|monthyear=February 2024}}

Mount Churchill

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 07:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mount Churchill; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Which of your DYK-reviews is QPQ for this one?
  • The hook is very interesting, but doesn't it need a "that" in front of "Mount Churchill" (or, alternatively, "the volcano Mount Churchill"? Also, I suggest "caused" instead of "driven".
  • The hook statement does not seem to be clearly stated in the article. The article only states that a migration happened between the eruption and the arrival of Europeans, but it is not clearly stated (and sourced) that the volcano might have been responsible for this long-distance migration.
  • Unrelated to this, I suggest to add the elevation of the volcano to the lead. This is the first thing that many readers want to know when reading about a mountain.
  • Something on flora and fauna would have been nice, but optional for GA and DYK of course.
  • In conclusion: This is a recent GA; well written with high-quality sources, and comprehensive. No copyvio apparent. Only one image unfortunately, but it is freely licensed. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 02:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Put the QPQ in (the "reviewed" parameter is for the QPQ not the reviewer); for want of time I usually don't do my QPQs immediately after the article work. Other Dene people migrated south and east[l] after the eruption is the text in question and many sources associate the Dene migration with the eruption. There is no information on flora and fauna, probably because the high St. Elias Mountains are well above the vegetation line. There are four elevation estimates and no clear way by which to prioritize. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok. But I still have two open questions: 1) You state that "Other Dene people migrated south and east[l] after the eruption" is the text in question, but this does not explicitly state that the eruption is responsible (no causality implied), which is the key claim of your hook. 2) If there are several elevation estimates and it is not clear which is to prioritize, why is only one given in the infobox? In that case, all four should appear in the infobox (or none, or a range), but picking only one of those estimates seems arbitrary to me. Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pulled the infobox claim. For the other, it's in an entire paragraph about how people migrated because of the eruption. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:40, 12 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK. Passing now, nice work! Jens Lallensack (talk) 11:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC){{subst:DYK bottom|passed=yes}}Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 10[edit]

Maxine North, Polaris drinking water, Robert G. North

( Comment or view )
  • ... that Maxine North thought she would never return to Thailand after the death of her alleged CIA spy husband, but ultimately settled there and introduced bottled water to the country? Source: "Bob North died of polio. The day after his funeral Maxine North went back to the U.S. She swore never to return."[46] "her husband, screenwriter Robert North. He headed the Far East Film Co... The company served as a cover for his work with the Central Intelligence Agency"[47] "Some sources even consider the company to have been one of the many fronts for American CIA activities in Thailand, a relationship that would have been neither surprising nor unusual in the country at this time, yet one for which there is (as yet) no real concrete evidence."[48] "Maxine Robert North, an American widow with no experience in Asia, ignored the jibes and went on to pioneer Thailand's bottled water industry."[49]

Created by Paul 012 (talk). Self-nominated at 11:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Maxine North; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Sardar (horse)

(
)
Sardar presented by Pakistan's President
Sardar presented by Pakistan's President

Created by Whispyhistory (talk). Self-nominated at 07:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sardar (horse); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Born to Run

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Zmbro (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 16:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Born to Run; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Mussel Inn

(
)
Jane Dixon pouring a beer

Created by Pakoire (talk) and Marshelec (talk). Nominated by Pakoire (talk) at 00:46, 11 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mussel Inn; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Suggest slight re-wording: ".... that the proprietor of the music venue Mussel Inn in Onekaka built tables strong enough for up to eight people to dance on?" MurielMary (talk) 01:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walter Abel Heurtley

(
)

Moved to mainspace by UndercoverClassicist (talk). Self-nominated at 18:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Walter Abel Heurtley; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Majella O'Donnell

(
)

Created by Bogger (talk). Self-nominated at 15:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Majella O'Donnell; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Ivan Ančić

(
)
Ivan Ančić
Ivan Ančić

5x expanded by Governor Sheng (talk). Self-nominated at 06:27, 10 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ivan Ančić; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Current nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on February 11[edit]

Bob Moore (American food executive)

(
)
Moore in 2012
Moore in 2012

Created by Thriley (talk) and Cerebral726 (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 02:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bob Moore (American food executive); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Gary Bossert

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 20:31, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gary Bossert; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I was suppose to nominate this by the 12th I think, but I got distracted and forgot to. If it is too late, I can nom at GAN and come back later.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I created the page in my sandbox on 2/5, but I did not move it to main space until 2/11. So this in time. I am going to move it to the Feb 11 section.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The hook as currently written is a bit complicated and hard to read. My suggestion would be to split the hook into two separate hooks (one for the three-point shots, the other for the free throws). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The issue here is the hook, not the article, so how it is presented in the article is irrelevant to my specific concern. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:53, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
User:Narutolovehinata5, I am just trying to understand why it is so confusing. It is almost the exact same text as the WP:LEAD opening paragraph. Is that some sort of wild mess or something. Is it not possible to say two things in a hook if they make sense. The scale of his uniqueness is not well represented by either single point.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:49, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TonyTheTiger: Think of a hook as a run-on sentence. It's trying to say two things at once without break, and the flow of how that is presented can be tiring. A regular reader who reads the hook may feel tired from reading it all at once. This isn't about how impressive his work is, it's about the interest of the reader. This is why I was suggesting splitting it into two separate hooks; personally, I think either by itself is impressive enough, but it's also more "bite-sized" that would be more likely to keep a reader's attention than something more winded. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also just realized that the hook is 201 characters and thus cannot be used. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:54, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well the limit is 200 right?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1 * ... that Gary Bossert has made the most single-game consecutive three-point shots and second most single-game free throws without a miss?
The limit is indeed 200, but the new hook not only doesn't address my original concern, but also introduces an error because it now lacks the "NCAA Division I" qualifier, making the hook appear to be a general hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:52, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2023–24 College Football Playoff

(
)

5x expanded by PCN02WPS (talk). Self-nominated at 23:41, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2023–24 College Football Playoff; 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: Everything looks good, but there is a merge discussion still active. It would probably be best to wait until that is closed before this is approved. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:44, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Zwycięzcy oceanu

(
)

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 10:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Zwycięzcy oceanu; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 12[edit]

Shelton Tappes

(
)
  • ... that Shelton Tappes compared his work on discrimination claims for the UAW to a fire station, saying "when the bell rings, we run to put out the fire"? Source: Korstad, Robert; Lichtenstein, Nelson (1988) doi:10.2307/1901530 " 'We are a fire station' admitted Tappes, who served in the department during the 1950s and 1960s, 'and when the bell rings we run to put out the fire.'
    • ALT1: ... that the UAW's 1941 union contract with the Ford Motor Company included a then-unique antidiscrimination clause negotiated by Black foundryman Shelton Tappes? Source: Lichtenstein, Nelson (2013). A Contest of Ideas: Capital, Politics, and Labor p 116 "Foundryman Shelton Tappes.. helped negotiate a then unique antidiscrimination clause into the first UAW-Ford contract. Bates,2012, p. 255 "the antidiscrimination clause, was the handiwork of Shelton Tappes"
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I am working on reviewing my QPQ

Created by HouseOfChange (talk). Self-nominated at 05:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Shelton Tappes; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Kate Gleason

(
)

"Before the trip, Kate had neglected her looks. One of her former teachers and even Susan B. Anthony had chided her about her appearance, and more than one person had told Kate that she smelled like horses, which she loved to ride.”! Now, she realized, after two months in one black cashmere dress, it was time for a change. “Shortly after the trip” Kate recalled, “I began to consider my clothes. Apparently, everybody else had been considering them for some time; but to me dress had seemed of little importance.” Now, she “went in for extremely feminine attire. I had my hair dressed and wore violets in my muff, and had some soft, frivolous gowns made. This attention to dress repaid me well. Some of my customers spoke to me twenty years after about a certain dress or hat that I wore when I made a sale. I learned to value clothes, to love clothes, and to use clothes."

    • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by Rocfan275 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kate Gleason; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Laufey (singer)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Arconning (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 17:18, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Laufey (singer); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Texas Hold 'Em (song), 16 Carriages

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)

Created by ModulationBend (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 08:21, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Texas Hold 'Em (song); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Carnival (Kanye West and Ty Dolla Sign song)

(
)

Created by Soulbust (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 08:02, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Carnival (Kanye West and Ty Dolla Sign song); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

WFOR-TV

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie (talk) and Nathan Obral (talk). Nominated by Sammi Brie (talk) at 06:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/WFOR-TV; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Mexia Supermarket

(
)
  • ... that when Mexia Supermarket was abandoned following its owners' bankruptcy in late 1999, due to miscommunication all of the food was left inside to rot? Source: Steven Strange, a Fort Worth attorney representing New Advance Investment Corp which owned Mexia's, said that his clients filed for bankruptcy Sept 29 and that the property reverted to a bank. He said that he called the bank's attorneys to inform them of the bankruptcy filing and that the store had been shut down and the keys turned over. Normally, Strange said, the bank or trustee would take steps to dispose of the property. But that didn't happen in this case, he said. "I can't really tell you what happened," Strange said. "Apparently the electric company turned the electricity off Oct. 18 and obviously no one had done anything about it then" Strange said he blames miscommunication rather than a particular person for the problem "It's unfortunate it's occurred," he said "I don't know why the electricity was shut off. My clients were horrified about it." - Link: https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/649476940/
    • Reviewed: [[]]
    • Comment: This is my first DYK nomination so go easy on me. Please.

Created by CommissarDoggo (talk). Self-nominated at 20:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mexia Supermarket; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Otto H. Kahn House, James A. Burden House

( Comment or view )
( Article history links:
)

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 16:47, 12 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Otto H. Kahn House; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 13[edit]

Onekaka Power Station

(
)
Onekaka Dam under construction in the late 1920s
Onekaka Dam under construction in the late 1920s

Created by Marshelec (talk). Self-nominated at 19:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Onekaka Power Station; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Josef Ospelt

(
)
  • ... that Josef Ospelt served as Provincial administrator of Liechtenstein twice, both in a provisional manner? Source: "Nach dem Tod des Landesverwesers Karl von In der Maur am 11.12.1913 führte Ospelt im Auftrag von Fürst Johann II. bis zur Ernennung des neuen Landesverwesers Leopold von Imhof am 1.4.1914 die unaufschiebbaren Regierungsgeschäfte durch."
    "Auf Empfehlung des zurückgetretenen Landesverwesers Josef Peer beauftragte Johann II. Ospelt ab dem 23.3.1921 erneut mit der einstweiligen Führung der Regierungsgeschäfte." https://historisches-lexikon.li/Ospelt,_Josef
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: Not quite 5x, but significant expansion nonetheless to bring this hook into light.

5x expanded by TheBritinator (talk). Self-nominated at 17:58, 13 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Josef Ospelt; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I am getting 2,353 prose characters in this revision, and there are 3,495 characters of prose in the article currently according to the tool, which just looks nowhere near the fivefold expansion required. I am afraid this would have to be rejected at this time unless it can be expanded into something close to 11.7k characters, TheBritinator.--NØ 09:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Very well, N. I don't think I will be able to extent, though I can for at least a fair bit more. If you wish to reject it, then that's fine.


Articles created/expanded on February 14[edit]

Adrian Ward-Jackson

(
)

Created by No Swan So Fine (talk). Self-nominated at 23:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Adrian Ward-Jackson; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

1910 La Laguna's 1st Philippine Assembly district special election

(
)

Created by Howard the Duck (talk). Self-nominated at 02:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/1910 La Laguna's 1st Philippine Assembly district special 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 compliance:

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: There are significant problems with this nomination. On a DYK level, the QPQ is not complete and the hook is not interesting. Those problems can be overcome, but their are fundamental problems with the article. It only cites primary sources, in contradiction of the original research policy, which forbids basing an entire article on them. I have thus marked it as possibly not meeting WP:NEVENT, and am marking this nomination as rejected. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm confused. How can the Cablenews-American, a newspaper, be WP:PRIMARY? I suppose official government election reports are primary but not newspapers?
Please bring this to WP:AFD if you think this is not notable. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If the whole election was a tie, maybe yes that would work as a hook. But the tie was for only one town, so it's not really that hooky in this one instance, especially without additional context (like why is it important that it was in Biñan that it was tied, out of all places?) Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I dunno, even if a gubernatorial election was tied in a certain town, wherever it is, it's interesting, even if the election itself wasn't. The election itself was a landslide, with the winner carrying 6 towns, the loser 4, and one tied. A landslide election saw a tied result in one place. Imagine that. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I must admit to being very confused. I cannot see how the 1,400-1,000 victory can be described as a landslide, I cannot see why the not-rare occurence of ties in areas with a small population is being talked about like it's a mystical event, but most of all I cannot see why the fundamental issues of an incomplete QPQ and a complete reliance on primary sources are being disregarded in favour of this comparative tangent. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 04:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm confused myself. How is the "Cablenews-American" newspaper a primary source? AFAIK, this was not an instrument of the American government. If you think this fails WP:GNG, send this to AFD.
A 60:40 victory is a landslide in most definitions. The source itself calls it as a "big majority".
I'm actually looking for similar sized elections where the overall result was lopsided, but it was tied on one or more subdivisions and can't find one. Maybe I should try harder, I guess?
See WP:PRIMARY: "For Wikipedia's purposes, breaking news stories are also considered to be primary sources." I will nominate at AfD tomorrow if there are no further objections; do you know of any WP:SECONDARY sources Howard the Duck? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 06:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cobb Power Station

(
)

Created by Marshelec (talk). Self-nominated at 21:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Cobb Power Station; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Hypericum sect. Androsaemum, Aniculus aniculus

( Comment or view )

Created by Fritzmann2002 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hypericum sect. Androsaemum; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Prince Karl Aloys of Liechtenstein

(
)
Prince Karl Aloys
Prince Karl Aloys
  • ... that in 1920 Prince Karl Aloys (pictured) presented a draft for a new constitution of Liechtenstein, but it was rejected? Source: "Ein von Karl im April 1920 vorgelegter Verfassungsentwurf, der sich eng an die monarchistische Staatsauffassung von 1862 anlehnte, spielte in den weiteren Verhandlungen keine Rolle." https://historisches-lexikon.li/Liechtenstein,_Karl_von_(1878–1955)
    The source doesn't exactly say that it was outright rejected, but "played no role in further negotiations" strongly implies that. Given that the draft presented by Wilhelm Beck and Josef Peer later presented was accepted instead, the hook holds true.
    Here is the source of the latter just to verify: "1920 veröffentlichte Beck in den ON einen Verfassungsentwurf für eine konstitutionelle Monarchie auf demokratisch und parlamentarischer Grundlage mit Verankerung der Staatsgewalt in Fürst und Volk, Verantwortlichkeit der Regierung gegenüber dem Landtag und dem Recht auf Initiative und Referendum auf Gesetzes- und Verfassungsebene. Im September 1920 konnte Beck seine Vorstellungen in Verhandlungen auf Schloss Vaduz weitgehend durchsetzen. Die daraus resultierenden Schlossabmachungen vom 20.9.1920 und ein von Regierungschef Josef Peer als Regierungsvorlage präsentierter Verfassungsentwurf bildeten die Grundlage der neuen Verfassung vom 5.10.1921." https://historisches-lexikon.li/Beck,_Wilhelm
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: Image is optional.

5x expanded by TheBritinator (talk). Self-nominated at 17:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Prince Karl Aloys of Liechtenstein; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Jaroslav Záruba

(
)

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 06:38, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jaroslav Záruba; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on February 15[edit]

Mildmay Mission Hospital

(
)

Created by Fvasconcellos (talk). Self-nominated at 06:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Mildmay Mission Hospital; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Biodiversity Impact Credit

(
)

Created by Pinkchiken (talk). Self-nominated at 11:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Biodiversity Impact Credit; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 16[edit]

Tufted jay

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Grungaloo (talk). Self-nominated at 17:29, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Tufted jay; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Lapse (social network)

(
)

Created by I'm tla (talk). Self-nominated at 08:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lapse (social network); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Ultimate Team

(
)
  • ... that Ultimate Team is a video game mode most popular among young people, but is also regularly criticized as a form of gambling?

Moved to mainspace by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 00:09, 16 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ultimate Team; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 17[edit]

Hubertus, Hereditary Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha

(
)

Created by Therealscorp1an (talk). Self-nominated at 22:43, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Hubertus, Hereditary Prince of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Outcome switching

(
)

Created by Femke (talk). Self-nominated at 21:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Outcome switching; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Starting this review. Updates to follow. Ktin (talk) 02:34, 18 February 2024 (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: Article is new. At ~1600 words it just about meets the eligibility requirements. Earwig could not determine any copyvio concerns because of the nature of the cites (i.e. journals). However, I do not think there are any copyvio concerns based on some spot checks where I could access content. QPQ done. I have some thoughts on the hook and the lede. Will add them separately. Ktin (talk) 04:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hook and interestingness

  • There is a statement in the article, "Changes in primary outcome metrics are present in nearly one in three studies". I am thinking we could weave that in to create a punchy hook. e.g. "Per a study, one in three studies [clinical trials] engaged in outcome switching?"

Article structure

  • Can we consider the structuring the article into sections? This might allow us to expand the article. I was thinking of the below structure:
    • 1. Background -- What is context switching? When was the term coined? Do we have an instance of the first usage of the term?
    • 2. Prevalence -- studies on how rampant this practice is?
    • 3. Impacts -- negative effects stemming from outcome switching
    • 4. Preventative actions (should think of a better term for this section) -- what are prominent journals / academic bodies doing about this practice?
    • 5. Select examples (should think of a better term for this section) -- any popular studies that have been called out for outcome switching?

Other edits

  • Consider rephrasing "Changes in primary outcome metrics are present in nearly one in three studies" --> "Per a study by <researchers at x>, changes in primary outcome metrics are present in nearly one in three studies"
  • Consider a similar rephrasing for the sentence where we say that outcome switching in oncology "is more common in studies with a male first author, and in studies funded by non-profits."

Handing this back to the nominator. Ktin (talk) 04:59, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Imtiaz Qureshi

(
)

Created by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 08:30, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Imtiaz Qureshi; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • The article meets DYK requirements for newness and length. I didn't detect any close paraphrasing, and any quotes have been appropriately cited. The preference for ALT0 is noted, but personally ALT1 is probably the more interesting hook here given it's slightly less specialist and more eyecatchy; however, I would suggest modifying the hook to clarify that Bukhara is a restaurant brand, and that it's in Fahrenheit for the benefit of non-American/Liberian readers, perhaps with a Celsius conversion. I understand the quote used Fahrenheit, but the hook is not a direct quote anyway. A QPQ is still needed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:30, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Added QPQ. I feel 104-degree fever should be alright. Adding Fahrenheit will only make it verbose. Similarly with restaurant. Bukhara is wikilinked. Ktin (talk) 02:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ktin: We are writing for an international audience, and most of the world doesn't use Fahrenheit, including India. Readers outside the US and a handful of other countries who see the hook will just be confused. If there's a concern it will be verbose, just add the symbol, no need to include the full word (same with the Celsius conversion). The wikilink helps but may not be enough. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:36, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: I would agree with the need for units and conversions almost always. But, with a statement like 104-degree fever, it is hard to not think fahrenheit. Also, I do not agree with the assertion that India does not use Fahrenheit (specifically, for medical purposes). However, given our impasse, let's do this. I will write out both variants of the hooks. Let the promoting admin / editor take a call.
ALT0 ... that according to Indian chef Imtiaz Qureshi, who is credited with reviving the dum pukht cooking tradition, all biryanis are pulaos?
ALT1.1: ... that Indian chef Imtiaz Qureshi created the menu for the Bukhara overnight battling a 104-degree fever?
ALT1.2: ... that Indian chef Imtiaz Qureshi created the menu for the Bukhara restaurant overnight battling a 104-degree fahrenheit fever?
My first preference is for ALT0, and the second preference is ALT1.1. However, let the promoting admin take a call. ALT0 is actually the most interesting of these hooks. For contextualizing -- this is equivalent to the founder of the McDonalds burger saying that a burger is actually a sandwich. Ktin (talk) 04:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ktin: I think the issue here is that if a person isn't familiar with what biryanis are, they might not get the hook. Sure they're quite popular around the world, but we are aiming for the broadest audience, not the smallest one, and in my opinion, the fever angle is the one that's more easily understandable or self-evident. If there's a concern that using the full word "Fahrenheit" would make the hook more verbose, the symbol could probably be used, with it being left to the promoter if a conversion is necessary. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:24, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: It is fine for us to disagree. Let the promoting admin take a call. I am striking out the older hooks. My preference continues to remain the same. But, will defer to the promoting admin. Ktin (talk) 04:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thambi Naidoo

(
)
Thambi Naidoo
Thambi Naidoo

Created by Ktin (talk). Self-nominated at 05:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Thambi Naidoo; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Wyll Stanway

(
)

Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 02:54, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Wyll Stanway; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Milkrun

(
)

Created by Panamitsu (talk). Self-nominated at 02:18, 17 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Milkrun; 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: No - No.
  • Interesting: No - No.

QPQ: No - Not done.
Overall: Article created on 16 February, and meets the length requirement (though it is rather short and should be expanded). All sources are, as far as I can tell, reliable for the material they are cited for. Earwig reveals no copyvio, and I didn't spot any instances of unacceptably WP:Close paraphrasing. There are no obvious neutrality issues. The hook does not strictly speaking meet the requirement of being cited in the article no later than the end of the sentence, but this is rather academic as I don't find it interesting either. QPQ has not been done. Some comments on the content:

  • That month they also started selling Alcohol with the hope that it would improve Milkrun's losses. – three things here. Firstly, "alcohol" should not have a capital A. Secondly, did they start selling alcohol or delivering it? Thirdly, "also"? The body has not yet stated what the business model was prior to this.
  • In February 2023 Milkrun laid off 20% of its staff due to financial difficulties. – that's not quite what the cited sources say. They say that Milkrun started laying off staff in February and that they would lay off 20% of staff. That doesn't mean that the entirety of those 20% were laid off in February, specifically.
  • aswell – typo.
  • In May 2023, two months after closure – that seems like a contradiction seeing as it seems to have closed in mid-April. The cited source also says "less than two months".
  • Woolworths merged the customer bases of Milkrun and Metro60, Woolworths' competitor, and rebranded Metro60 to Milkrun. – this needs to be rephrased for clarity. If I understand it correctly, Metro60 competed against Milkrun, and was run by Woolworths. The current phrasing, "Woolworths' competitor", can easily be parsed as Metro60 competing against Woolworths.
  • Service rolled out to other regions in the months after. – the cited source states that, as of July when it was published, this was the plan. Not that it happened after that.

Ping Panamitsu. TompaDompa (talk) 13:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • @TompaDompa:, Thanks, I really appreciate your hard work reviewing the article. I believe I've fixed all the issues you've found in the article.
For the hook, I believe that going out of business and then relaunching a few months later is interesting, as usually companies stay closed, but I'm happy to find a new hook. I'm a bit confused about the hook not being in the body. While it doesn't specifically say that it was launched months later, it does say that it closed in May and launched in New Zealand in July. Does that not count? For sourcing, I'm a bit confused because the source does say that it went out of business in April and then launched in New Zealand in July, which is "months later". —Panamitsu (talk) 01:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on February 18[edit]

Beck–Fahrner syndrome

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Strange Orange (talk). Self-nominated at 05:03, 18 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Beck–Fahrner syndrome; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Yuna Ogata

(
)

Created by Miraclepine (talk). Nominated by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) at 03:01, 18 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Yuna Ogata; 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: [51]; discussion setting the six week limit can be found here: [52].
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=1208613089"