Template talk:Did you know

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from T:TDYK)
DYK queue status

There are currently 3 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

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
February 28 1
March 2 1
March 6 1 1
March 11 1
March 12 2 1
March 14 1
March 19 1
March 24 1
March 25 3
March 26 1 1
March 27 1 1
March 28 3 3
March 29 2 2
March 30 2
March 31 2 1
April 1 4 3
April 2 11 9
April 3 8 6
April 4 10 5
April 5 9 7
April 6 6 5
April 7 9 6
April 8 7 5
April 9 6 4
April 10 5 4
April 11 1 1
April 12 3 2
April 13 18 9
April 14 7 2
April 15 10 7
April 16 7 4
April 17 8 4
April 18 9 3
April 19 8 1
April 20 4 1
Total 173 98
Last updated 06:31, 20 April 2024 UTC
Current time is 07:36, 20 April 2024 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

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

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]

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 February 28[edit]

Kirby: King of Comics

Jack Kirby
Jack Kirby

5x expanded by OlifanofmrTennant (talk). Self-nominated at 20:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kirby: King of Comics; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • Expanded 5x, from 319 to 1614 characters; long enough. Well-sourced, neutral, no plagiarism. I like the first hook; its source is reliable. Great image; I agree that's a better one than the book cover. Well done taking a stub to a short-ish and salvageable article. Good to go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Figureskatingfan (talkcontribs) 21:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have pulled this nom from prep, as it fails to include a summary of the book's contents and thus fails WP:DYKCOMPLETE. It also contains at least two errors, one which says Evanier "obtained" artworks from Kirby "while working for him" - he only obtained access, and not apparently while working for him, and another which says the book was met with "positive" reviews when in fact it was panned by The Guardian critic. The article clearly needs more work before it can be featured, if it should be featured at all given the apparent errors. Gatoclass (talk) 09:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gatoclass I've begun working on a summary of the books contents, its been a while sinces I've read the book so I'll have to look over it again Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging nominator OlifanofmrTennant, reviewer Figureskatingfan, and promoter PrimalMustelid. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:15, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 2[edit]

One Chun

  • ... that One Chun, a Michelin Guide Bib Gourmand restaurant, has black-and-white televisions, transistor radios, and antique clocks on its walls? Source: Srivilai, Kasidit (2021-11-05). "Behind The Bib: Retro Decor Meets Phuket Flavours At One Chun. Retro decor harkens authentic Phuket tastes, plus great locally sourced ingredients". Michelin Guide. Archived from the original on 2024-03-02. Retrieved 2024-03-02.

    The article notes: "Chessadawan said while showing us a beautiful wall adorned with old clocks, transistor radios, and black-and-white television sets."

Created by Cunard (talk). Self-nominated at 10:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/One Chun; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[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: A finely put together article improving the coverage of food, Southeast Asia, and women. The article was new enough at the time of nomination, and it's long enough. There's a source at the end of every paragraph or quote (at the end of most sentences), and the hook is cited at its sentence. Earwig's detector comes back 20%, which from my reading is attributable to the quotations. The hook is interesting, since a Fifties aesthetic and Michelin fine-dining don't usually go together in one's mind. QPQ is done as well. There are only two minor problems@Cunard: first, the text of the Time Out Shanghai article on its own doesn't actually make that Bai Liang Phad Khai includes eggs—it only makes clear the leaves and shrimp (the images don't load from where I'm reading, so if the information was in the images, that may be why I'm having trouble verifying that bit). Second, I think the summarization of the Frommer's source to say that both Raya and One Chun serve roast duck and crab curry is slightly off. Frommer's states, Raya’s sister restaurant, One Chun, also serves the famous crab curry along with a host of cheaper Thai classics, like roasted duck in red curry. The wording of "along with a host of cheaper Thai classics" I think means that while roasted duck is one of the "cheaper Thai classics" that One Chun also serves, alongside the crab curry that both Raya and One Chun serves (meaning Frommer's verifies that One Chun serves roast duck, but not that Raya serves roast duck; it does verify that both serve crab curry). If these minor problems are fixed, I will happily approve the nomination. Feel free to ping me when it's ready. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Excellent! With these matters resolved, I am happy to approve the nomination. Thanks for your contribution to Wikipedia! Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Hydrangeans: A finely put together article improving the coverage of food, Southeast Asia, and women Have to disagree with you there, it reads like a press release to me. In fact when I came across it as part of NPP I had to check it wasn't written by a COI editor. Regards John B123 (talk) 19:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree and have tagged it as such. It's quite funny how the "Reception" section contains less reception (all positive, of course) than has beem inserted indiscriminately throughout the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I revised the article to shorten and have fewer quotes as recommended by Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Impartial tone, which says, "Try not to quote directly from participants engaged in a heated dispute; instead, summarize and present the arguments in an impartial, formal tone." I hope this addresses editors' concerns. As the Wikipedia's article author, I do not have a conflict of interest with the restaurant. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight says, "Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in those sources". I have complied with this policy by fairly representing reliable sources' viewpoint about the restaurant. Regarding "all positive, of course", I conducted an exhaustive search for reliable sources about the restaurant. I did not find negative coverage of the restaurant in reliable sources. Adding negative information about the restaurant to the article when it is unsupported by reliable sources would violate the neutral point of view and verifiability policies. Cunard (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • The minor edits you have made do nothing to make the article less like an advert or press release. IMHO the article needs a complete rewrite. The first major issue is the in-depth coverage of the menu. A good part of the lead and the largest section of the article is devoted to the menu. If you look at similar restaurant articles, the menu only takes up a paragraph at the most. Secondly, it needs to be written more objectively with less 'bigging up'. For example, Thai starlets in the source becomes Thai celebrities in the article. John B123 (talk) 23:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • Two concerns have been raised: (1) the menu section is too long and (2) the article is not written neutrally. I find the premise of (1) to be inaccurate. I welcome feedback about (2).
            1. If you look at similar restaurant articles, the menu only takes up a paragraph at the most. – I do not know what the "similar" qualifier in "similar restaurant articles" means. There are featured articles and good articles about restaurants with "Menu" or "Cuisine" sections that are three or more paragraphs long. The only featured article about a restaurant is Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater Restaurant, which has a three-paragraph "Food" section. There are numerous good articles about restaurants. There are good articles with a five-paragraph "Cuisine" section, a four-paragraph "Cuisine" section, a four-paragraph "Menu" section, a three-paragraph "Menu" section, and a three-paragraph "Cuisine" section.

              Alongside a restaurant's history and decor, its menu and cuisine is a very important part of its background. One Chun's "Dishes" section is three paragraphs, while its "History" and "Decor" sections are much smaller. That is because reliable sources spend considerable space discussing and critiquing the restaurant's dishes, much more than they discuss other aspects of the restaurant like its history and decor. As such, a three-paragraph summary of what the sources said about the menu—and three sentences in the lead—complies with the due weight policy.

              Secondly, it needs to be written more objectively with less 'bigging up'. For example, Thai starlets in the source becomes Thai celebrities in the article. – when revising the article based on comments in this DYK nomination, I paraphrased the "Thai starlets" quote to be "Thai celebrities". As "celebrities" is "bigging up" compared to "starlets", I've modified the sentence to use "Thai starlets" again.

              The sources are universally positive about the restaurants' dishes and decor. I believe the article complies with Wikipedia:Neutral point of view in fairly representing the sources' viewpoints. I do not believe "the article needs a complete rewrite". I sometimes overlook things like the "Thai celebrities" issue you pointed out, so I welcome specific feedback about how to make it "written more objectively with less 'bigging up'".

            Cunard (talk) 07:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
            • The articles you link to are generally larger articles, so the menu/cuisine sections form a proportionally smaller part of the article. Reliable sources spend considerable space discussing and critiquing the restaurant's dishes, most of the references in the Dishes section are short mentions in 'Where to eat in Phuket' type articles or directory entries such as Lonely Planet. WP:NOTPRICE seems to be applicable here: An article should not include product pricing or availability information (which can vary widely with time and location) unless there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention, which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) providing commentary on these details instead of just passing mention. John B123 (talk) 08:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
              • For the featured and good articles I linked, there is plenty of coverage about the restaurants' history, decor, and menu, so the menu sections must "form a proportionally smaller part of [those] article[s]". For this article, there is less coverage about the restaurant's history and decor but more coverage about the menu, so the menu must form a proportionally larger part of the article. The decision of how much to cover should be done on a case-by-case basis reliant on how much reliable sources cover each area. The length of this Wikipedia article's menu section does not make it violate Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

                WP:NOTPRICE says:

                A resource for conducting business. Neither articles nor their associated talk pages are for conducting the business of the topic of the article. Listings to be avoided include, but are not limited to: business alliances, clients, competitors, employees (except CEOs, supervisory directors and similar top functionaries), equipment, estates, offices, store locations, contact information, patent filings, products and services, sponsors, subdivisions and tourist attractions. An article should not include product pricing or availability information (which can vary widely with time and location) unless there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention, which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) providing commentary on these details instead of just passing mention. Wikipedia is not a price comparison service to compare prices and availability of competing products or a single product from different vendors. Lists of creative works are permitted. Thus, for example, Wikipedia should not include a list of all books published by HarperCollins, but may include a bibliography of books written by HarperCollins author Veronica Roth.

                The information in the "Dishes" section is not a "A resource for conducting business". It is not a listing of "products and services". It is not "product pricing or availability information".

                It is information from "independent source[s]" with "encyclopedic significance for the mention". It is information from "mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) providing commentary on these details instead of just passing mention". The "Where to eat in Phuket" type articles and the Lonely Planet book are not "just passing mention[s]". They provide a few sentences to a paragraph about the subject that includes "commentary on these details".

                This is why I provided in-text attribution of reviewers' commentary contextualising and critiquing the dishes.

                If the first paragraph of the "Dishes" section was written like this, it would violate WP:NOTPRICE for being a listing without any "commentary on details":

                "One's Chun's dishes include crab curry made with coconut milk, Nam Prik Goong Siab, Mu Hong, and roasted red pork."

                But the first paragraph of the "Dishes" section includes "commentary on details" through contextualisation and critiquing so does not violate WP:NOTPRICE:

                Lonely Planet's Isabella Noble praised the restaurant for its seafood, citing its crab curry made with coconut milk. One Chun serves Nam Prik Goong Siab, a spicy entrée made with shrimp paste and containing dried shrimp that has been deep fried, giving it a "savoury crunchiness". The dish includes vegetables to alleviate the peppery taste, which Kasidit Srivilai of the Michelin Guide said "balanc[es] the mixture's saltiness and sourness". Two meat dishes are Mu Hong, a pork belly stew made with low-temperature cooking and flavored with the spices pepper and garlic, and roasted red pork.

                The "Cuisine" section of the good article Gage and Tollner discusses in substantial detail that restaurant's cuisine and menu throughout the years, while its reception section includes critics' commentary about the cuisine and service. For the "Dishes" section of One Chun's Wikipedia article, I chose to have the menu section include critics' commentary. This is up to editorial discretion. Both approaches are policy-compliant editorial decisions.

                Cunard (talk) 09:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

                • I note we have gone from reliable sources spend considerable space discussing and critiquing the restaurant's dishes to provide a few sentences to a paragraph about the subject that includes "commentary on these details", which is still overgenerous in a lot of cases. In my view the Dishes section is availability information so WP:NOTPRICE is applicable. No matter how you try and fit WP policies and guidelines to what has been written, the article still comes as a promotion for the restaurant. John B123 (talk) 10:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                  • There is no conflict between my two statements. The "Where to eat in Phuket" type articles and the Lonely Planet book provide a few sentences to a paragraph about the restaurant's dishes. Collectively, the reliable sources spend considerable space discussing and critiquing the restaurant's dishes. I explained why WP:NOTPRICE is not violated: "availability information" does not violate the policy when there is "there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention". I linked to a featured article and multiple good articles about restaurants that discuss their menu in a similar way to this article, showing this is standard practice for restaurant articles.

                    Although I consider the WP:NOTPRICE concern to be unsupported by policy or practice, I remain open to feedback about specific parts of the article that can be "written more objectively with less 'bigging up'". Cunard (talk) 11:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

                    • Adding 'collectively' before 'the reliable sources spend considerable space discussing and critiquing the restaurant's dishes' makes a huge difference to the meaning of your original statement. You explanation of why you think WP:NOTPRICE is not applicable is fundamentally flawed. Firstly, phrases like another crab dish the restaurant serves is crab spring rolls require a huge stretch of the imagination to be thought of as of encyclopedic significance. Secondly, many of the sources used just give the restaurant a passing mention.
I'd draw your attention to the SNG for restaurants WP:RESTAURANTREVIEWS. This establishes the types of reviews that are 'significant' and can be included towards notability. Most of the reviews used in the article fail the test to be 'significant'. The SNG goes on to cover independent reviews and states Often, sponsored nature of a review is not disclosed and not immediately apparent. In particular, a strong indication of a sponsored or other relationship is a review that is excessively positive or negative Later it is stated Once notability is established, non-independent reviews may be used to verify some non-controversial facts in the article (e.g. number of employees, number of tables in a restaurant, product models) This suggests to me that reviews needs to be demonstrably independent or just used to verify non-controversial facts. What somebody thinks is a good dish is subjective and therefore potentially controversial. John B123 (talk) 21:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
                      • It has the same effect with regard to proportionality of coverage within the article. Regarding WP:NOTPRICE, I've removed the sentence about crab rolls. I consider the sources in the article to be independent reliable sources. Which sources do you consider to be possibly sponsored or "non-independent reviews" that are being used to describe "What somebody thinks is a good dish"? Cunard (talk) 22:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking at the sources, and in the same order as the refs section:
  1. Manager Daily - looks like a paid piece, no author given
  2. Michelin Guide - Sound source
  3. SMH - Brief mention extracted from Michelin Guide
  4. Thansettakij - Churnalism based on the Michelin Guide
  5. Thaiger - Obvious churnalism, the author, Ye Man Pyae, seems to specialise in 'best of' articles ranging from eateries to nursery schools to best best places to teach English in Thailand (teach not learn)
  6. BK - Short listing, nothing there that's not on One Chun's Facebook which it links to
  7. Lonely Planet Thailand - Single sentence listing
  8. Lonely Planet Phuket - 3 sentence listing
  9. Michelin Guide - Sound source
  10. Manager Daily - Probably churnalism, no author given
  11. SMH - single sentence mention
  12. Nation - 2 sentence listing
  13. Michelin Guide - Sound source
  14. Manager Daily - Passing mention (half a sentence)
  15. Michelin Guide - Sound source
  16. Lifestyle Asia - Looks independent, information here that doesn't seem to be elsewhere. Probably too short to count towards notability, but still a reliable source IMHO.
  17. Timeout - Looks independent, but again probably too short to count towards notability
  18. CNN - Passing mention
  19. Manager Daily - Passing mention
  20. Frommers - Passing mention in (paid?) article about sister restaurant Raya
  21. Manager Daily - 7 sentences in a long article promting the Nissan X-Trail. As this an obvious promotional article, I doubt it would be considered a reliable source.
  22. Australian - Passing mention
  23. Khaosod - Passing mention
John B123 (talk) 22:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Having your specific concerns enumerated is very helpful. Thank you for taking the time to review all the sources. Some of the sources were listed as short or being churnalism for reporting on the Michelin Guide Bib Gourmand designation. I do not consider either of those attributes as causing those sources to be unreliable so will not go into detail on those sources. The reliability of three sources—Manager Daily, Frommer's, and The Thaiger—was questioned, so I will discuss them below.

Manager Daily is a national business newspaper with a circulation of 300,000 in 2016. From my observations and a review of its articles, Manager Daily generally does not use bylines. A lack of bylines is standard for Thai journalism. According to this Routledge book, "Front-page political news stories in Thai language newspapers never carried a by-line; indeed, by-lines were rare for news stories anywhere in the Thai press, other than some weekly magazines. In part this reflected Thai traditions of journalism, but it also derived from the fact that these stories really did not have a single author."

I consider Manager Daily to be a reputable newspaper. From this working paper by Ramkhamhaeng University faculty member Suchart Sriyaranya:

Some newspapers pay a high monthly salary or even pay more for one article than their competitors. Many well-known academics write as columnists in Manager Daily on this basis. Manager Daily rose to become the most successful newspaper during an era of economic boom in Thailand. It was started as a weekly business magazine and later developed to be a daily newspaper. Its editorial direction is different from that of Matichon Daily. While Matichon represents mostly progressive readers, Manager Daily has targeted a rising group of younger urban professionals or Yuppies who work in business sectors. As it can offer the good-quality daily articles written by many famous intellectuals, as well as provide the news contents in focussing in the business sectors, Manager has succeeded in combining its globalized image with the contributions of academics and information demands of bussiness groups.

These articles are positive restaurant reviews written by Manager Daily's travel and food team. I do not think Manager Daily would publish sponsored articles without disclosure.

Frommer's is a reputable travel guide publisher. The Frommer's review rated One Chun's sister restaurant two out of three stars. I think a paid article would give three out of three stars, not two.

The Thaiger is a source with a less established history and the concerns about the author, a junior journalist, are valid. I've removed the content based on The Thaiger from the article.

Cunard (talk) 06:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure that the website mgronline.com is the same as Manager Daily? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:58, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Manager Daily's website is mgronline.com. This article (citation details) from the Chulalongkorn University Journal of Social Sciences says:

"'Somsak' Poet Sun Phak Ko Mo Mo Khorat Chuenmuen-Prachachon Nakrop Mue Top Ruam Nueangnaen." ['Somsak' Opens the Party’s Branch. Committee Happy–A Lot of Hand-Clapping People Joined the Event]. 2009. Manager Daily Online, August 10. Accessed February 21, 2016. https://mgronline.com/local/detail/9520000090638. (in Thai)

This article from S&P Global says:

The Bank of Thailand and the Thai Ministry of Finance allowed U.S.-based PayPal Inc. to continue providing services for Thai customers until the end of 2022, Manager Daily reported.

Cunard (talk) 21:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with sources here is well illustrated by Belinda Jackson's article in the Sydney Morning Herald, Things to do in Phuket, Thailand: One day three ways, in which she states: Lunch is a chance to rub shoulders with Thai starlets at One Chun restaurant: order the rich, creamy crab and coconut curry. Does this mean she has visited One Chun and ate the curry with Thai starlets, or does this mean she has read somewhere about this? Given the number of articles she writes, I doubt the Herald's budget stretches to jetting her around the world almost continually to write these articles. If she hasn't visited One Chun, where did she get the information from? We have no idea whether these sources were reliable or not, nor do we know when the source(s) she used were published. The article was written in 2015, 9 years ago, although the information may have come from before then. As 'in' places change over time, we have no way of knowing if what was correct 9+ years ago is still correct today, the Thai starlets may well now frequent a different establishments. Restaurants change their menus, so rich, creamy crab and coconut curry may no longer be available. (When I lived in the UK, our local Jamie Oliver restaurant changed it's menu several times a year.)
Politics and the Press in Thailand: Media Machinations that you referred to above goes on to give criticism of the Thai practice of using multiple authors to produce articles, leading to poor articles. Although the criticism was specifically about political articles in Thai Rath, the shortcomings raised would seem to be equally valid for other article types and publications, including Manager Daily, using this type of reporting.
John B123 (talk) 07:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Belinda Jackson is a travel writer for The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia's newspaper of record. From Belinda Jackson's website, "I have travelled every continent and lived on three". She has written numerous pieces about Thailand for The Sydney Morning Herald (1, 2, 3, and 4). It is clear from her article that One Chun is one of the places she visited during her time in Phuket. The feedback about the information being nine years old is noted. I've updated the article to add the date this statement was made.

Regarding Politics and the Press in Thailand: Media Machinations, the book says:

Political rewriters were not always satisfied with the quality of news material sent in to them by reporters. In an internal memo sent to all members of the political team on 24 April 1995, Weerajak Konthong (better known as the columnist 'Chalam Khiao', or Green Shark) set out his criticisms of reporters' material. The memo contained five points. Weerajak first observed that since parliament was opening, politics was becoming more complex, and there were lots of different issues every day. People who wanted to get into the news were speaking at great length, but the problem Thai Rath faced was that the newspaper did not have much space for political news.

The second point from Konthong's memo: "Political news had to be tightly written, and reporters had to be news-hounds (suakhao, literally news-tigers) rather than simply sending in what they taperecorded." The third point: "it was a shame reporters felt they did not know what the main issue was, and sent in long stories accordingly". The fourth point: "reporters might well ask why it was that rewriters did not do the job of shortening their material". The fifth point: "reporters needed to read the newspapers before starting work, so that they would be familiar with the development of particular issues".

I do not think that any of these points detract from the reliability of the Manager Daily reviews. The reviews show a good understanding of the restaurant and are not "simply sending in what they taperecorded".

Cunard (talk) 09:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think a new review is necessary for an uninvolved opinion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I too worry about the amount of content that could date. Dishes go on and off menus all the time. If any of them should be mentioned, they should be attributed. There are a few other sentences that stand out; "All the dishes are beautifully cooked using herbs and freshest seafood" is something I'd expect to see on a press release, "When it is the right season" tells me the square root of jack.--Launchballer 09:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "All the dishes are beautifully cooked using herbs and freshest seafood" sentence was quoted from the Michelin Guide. I've removed it. Thank you for the feedback. I've implemented your feedback. Cunard (talk) 10:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I kept rewording my sentence. I think "CNN travel writer Kate Springer listed One Chun among Phuket Town's "top restaurants".[5]" should also come out as well. Arguably the rest of the History section should be merged with the 'Decor and ambience' section and put in chronological order, but that's not really a DYK issue. Once you've done that, you can take the tag off and I'll approve this.--Launchballer 20:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reviewing the article again. I've removed that sentence. It's unclear to me how to combine the "History" and "Decor and ambience" sections owing to their focus on different aspects of the restaurant, so I've left the two sections as is for now. Cunard (talk) 05:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's roll.--Launchballer 09:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noting here that I don't plan on promoting this as it will likely get pulled up at WT:DYK or ERRORS. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked the source. It says "wall", not "walls", and "old clocks" rather than "antique clocks". I propose the following:
ALT1: that upon awarding One Chun a Bib Gourmand, the Michelin Guide complimented a "wall adorned with old clocks, transistor radios and black-and-white television sets"?--Launchballer 12:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: thank you for pointing this out. I've modified the article. The Michelin Guide article calls the decorations "beautiful", so the hook's wording of "complimented" is accurate. I like this hook, but I'm worried that editors would consider that hook too positive and promotional owing to the concerns raised in this discussion. Here is an alternative hook:

ALT2: ... that One Chun, a Michelin Guide Bib Gourmand restaurant, has black-and-white televisions, transistor radios, and aged clocks on a wall?

Cunard (talk) 10:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I only just saw this because I don't tend to check the Approved list with any regularity. I'm not comfortable with 'has', as it could change, and I'm not really convinced 'aged' means the same as 'old'. ALT3: ... that One Chun, when awarded a Michelin Guide Bib Gourmand, had black-and-white televisions, transistor radios, and old clocks on a wall?--Launchballer 13:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let's get a new reviewer in here to look at the ALT hooks, since one was proposed by the previous reviewer (I've struck the previously approved original hook due to the issues raised, which leaves ALT1, ALT2 and ALT3). Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 11[edit]

Darwin Rocksitters Club

Created by 8UB3RG1N3 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Darwin Rocksitters Club; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • The article was created on time; however, the article creator was Aliceinthealice and not 8UB3RG1N3, so Aliceinthealice needs a credit as well. No QPQ required as the nominator only has three nominations. The article could probably use some minor copyediting: there are a few grammatical errors here and there, and the sentence "What made this unique was that the rocks they sat on would be a metre underwater at high tide in the crocodile infested waters." might need to be revised as it sound a bit like editorializing. My preferred hooks are the original hook and ALT1 with a slight preference for ALT1 although I will not oppose ALT0 being promoted instead. The issue is that ALT1's source, or at least the link given, doesn't mention the crocodile-infested waters thing. The link will thus need to be changed to the actual page on the website that mentions it. The source is primary, but given the noncontroversial nature it should be acceptable in this case. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:28, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have made some changes to this page to address the concerns above; I hope they address these concerns sufficiently Aliceinthealice (talk) 23:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aliceinthealice: Thank you. However, the edits made to the article do not address the concerns about the crocodiles because, while they mention the waters being infested with crocodiles, the sources do not make an explicit link to rocksitting. Thus, the claim and its sourcing could be classified as synthesis and thus unsuitable. If the sourcing issues with ALT1 can't be fixed, we may have just to stick with ALT0. In any case, there are still some minor grammatical errors in the article; perhaps an editor like Launchballer can give this a quick copyedit to help this move forward. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you (talk I have removed the sentence and I would apprecaite if another editor could do the copy editing, Cheers :) Aliceinthealice (talk) 01:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've given this a very quick copyedit, may come back for another pass.--Launchballer 08:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: Thanks for the copyedit; is everything okay now or can wordings still be improved? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've reworded what's there, however with multiple short sentences and one section much longer than the other, this article does not meet WP:DYKCOMPLETE.--Launchballer 13:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 12[edit]

Forever Young (horse)

Forever Young
Forever Young

Created by NinetyNineDragon (talk). Self-nominated at 16:16, 12 March 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Forever Young (horse); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

    • Comments: Well done for creating such an article. However, to make this article more presentable as I mentioned in the Talk area of the article that the Japanese references in the article need to be replaced with English. Both JBIS and Netkeiba have English and can readily be used as references.
    • The statistics needs to conform to what is used in the English wikipedia space. There are columns with abbreviations which as specific in Japanese form reader but for the US/English make no sense. Also the odds are not displayed as payout coefficients. Margins are in lengths or part of horse's posture (head, neck, nose etc...) Brudder Andrusha (talk) 21:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • First of all, thank you very much for revising the article. The quality of the article cannot be decent without your help. Second, may I know whether there are any rules stating that English references are better than those which are not in English? For articles about Japanese stuff, isn't that Japanese references are more accurate and relevant?
      • Third, for your comment about the abbreviations in the statistics section, could you provide some good articles for my reference? You may guess that I am not that familiar with horse racing from my contributions (but obviously someone with limited knowledge cannot write this article). NinetyNineDragon (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a comment and not a review, but even as someone who's watched Uma Musume, I'm not a fan of the hook. It's more about Fujita or even the game itself than the horse, and the guidelines say that hooks that are only tangentially about the bolded article should be avoided. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I believe the hook is definitely not tangentially about the article. The information in the hook is completely mentioned in the headline of the source (the Nikkan Sports article) I put above. I guess not everyone here knows Japanese so let me put a rough translations of the headline here: "[Saudi Derby] Uma Musume's Fujita Susumu Got First Overseas Graded Race Victory, Owns Forever Young '[I] won'". If you google Japanese news articles about Forever Young, you will find it is not rare for them to mention Uma Musume at the same time.
    • If you think it is not generally interesting enough, is this better to you:
    ALT1: ... that someone wants Forever Young (pictured), the winner of the Saudi Derby, to be turned into a horse girl because he is owned by the CEO of CyberAgent? Source: https://www.inside-games.jp/article/2023/12/13/150914.html
I mean, even the source you provided (or at least the quote) focuses on the owner and not the horse itself. Having said that, ALT1 might be better and address my concerns, but the wording isn't the greatest given how vague the word "someone" is in this context. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:55, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Full review needed, including hooks. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

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

Overall: Thank you for this positive article about a racehorse. The picture is nice, too. Just two issues:

  • Earwig picks up only one phrase: the track record for the distance by about two seconds. Please rephrase it, to avoid copyright violation..
  • Hooks: ALT0 is fine. We are talking about a racehorse here, which is not a person or a pet. In this context it is a sports icon and the property of an investor (Some of us may not like that, but that's not the point. The point is the facts). So we must compare it to articles about racing cars, racing bikes etc. where riders, owners and winnings get all the attention. In ALT1, the word "someone" is a bit weird, even a bit creepy. Maybe name them - or at least their trade or position?
  • Re article content: notability for this subject seems to be about the winning record, which is a good one in this case. and the winnings are tabled in full in the article. So no problem of content there.
  • I have given the article a minor copyedit, which does not affect DYK.

If you can resolve the above two issues, then this nomination should be good to go. Storye book (talk) 11:16, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: @NinetyNineDragon: As of this edit on 16 April 2024, the article has had a number of new edits, but the above issues have not been addressed. Please resolve this? Thank you. Storye book (talk) 11:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on March 14[edit]

Descendants of Christian IX of Denmark

Christian IX with various children and grandchildren at Fredensborg Palace. Specific subjects are identified here.
Christian IX with various children and grandchildren at Fredensborg Palace. Specific subjects are identified here.

The executed Nicholas II of Russia. The queen that never set foot in her country, Alexandra of Yugoslavia. Accomplished Olympian Constantine II of Greece. The last king of the Congo, Baudouin of Belgium. An heir forging his 21st-century path, William, Prince of Wales. What do all of these people have in common (besides being royals)? They can claim descent from the Father-in-law of Europe, Christian IX of Denmark!

If this DYK is approved, readers will be enticed to learn about how the royal families of Europe are biological relatives to a closer extent than some may think! Created by AndrewPeterT (talk). Self-nominated at 03:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.



@AndrewPeterT: Hi, there! I will be reviewing this Did You Know nomination. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 23:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review checklists

DYK eligibility scan results: (See here for details.)

  • Prose size (text only): 7669 characters (1201 words) "readable prose size"
  • Article created by AndrewPeterT on March 9, 2024
  • Article moved from Draft:Descendants of Christian IX of Denmark on March 14, 2024
  • Article has not been expanded 5x since it was created
  • Article has not been created or expanded 5x or promoted to Good Article within the past 10 days (27 days) DYKcheck does not account for previous versions with splits or copyright violations.


General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

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

Overall: Yes Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Review discussion

@AndrewPeterT: Well done for nominating this article, a topic that is of great interest to me. The hook I prefer is ALT0. As you'd know, there are a few criteria for DYK:

  • This article was moved into the mainspace on 14 March and nominated on 18 March. Therefore, it is new enough.
  • My immediate primary concern for this article was the overwhelming amount of tables in its use. However, good use of background information for each child ensures that there are around 6800-6900 characters of original prose. This makes the article long enough.
  • These hooks, of which I prefer ALT0, are adequately sources, so there do exist cited hooks.
  • As you have less than five DYK nominations, there is no quid pro quo required.
  • Finally, the article's prose is well cited. Information within some tables, however, is not. Though it is clear that effort has been made to source information in some tables, some tables lack sourcing entirely. I am not too concerned with lack of sources for their birth and death dates as that can be found on their respective articles, but it is moreso their children. For example, three of Princess Alexandra of Hanover and Cumberland's children lack sources.
  • The article has good spelling and grammar. There are a few fixes that could be made:
    • "would go on to have" ➜ "had"
    • "would go on to fight" ➜ "fought"
    • "would go on long sea voyages..." ➜ "went on long sea voyages..."
    • "Also, Alexandra and Edward's eldest..." ➜ "Additionally [or Furthermore, Moreover, etc.], Alexandra and Edward's eldest..."
    • After addressing him, he no longer needs to be repeatedly called "George I", he can just be called "George". Same goes for anyone else with ordinals. If it is a new paragraph, feel free to restate the ordinal. I would suggest however, you write "Christian IX" instead of "Christian" the whole time.
    • "Dagmar took the name Maria Feodorovna" ➜ "Dagmar took the name "Maria Feodorovna"". Italics not needed here. Quotation marks around her name is optional and up to you.
    • "Moreover, both Nicholas and Michael were killed during the Russian Revolution." ➜ "Moreover, both Nicholas and Michael, along with Nicholas's five children, were killed during the Russian Revolution." Yes, only talking about the children are being talked about, but it is best to include them as they were also closely-related relatives who also died as a result of the Revolution.
    • In the ALT0 hook, I would change it from "the parents to" ➜ "the parents of".

So, in summary, all that needs to be addressed is the sourcing within tables and a few spelling and grammar mistakes. I am also a bit concerned with the amount of WP:WHITESPACE. If this can't be fixed, it is not too much of a concern. Please let me know if you need any assistance or clarification. I hope this helps and I look forward to hopefully having this in DYK. Thanks. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Therealscorp1an: Thank you very much for your detailed evaluation and feedback. I have no objections to the ALT0 hook being used on the Main Page. Could you please let me know when I should make the suggested changes? As you noted, I am still in the process of citing some of the information in the tables. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 02:12, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AndrewPeterT: As soon as possible. The quicker these are addressed, the quicker we can place it on DYK. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 04:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All suggested spelling and grammar corrections have been made. I am prioritizing citing sources for the great-grandchildren of Christian IX and Louise. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 04:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AndrewPeterT: Great job. There's one other thing I would change. In the caption of the photo that will be used for the hook, I would change "Christian IX with various children and grandchildren at Fredensborg Palace." to "1886 portrait of Christian IX and his family by Laurits Tuxen." It's best the artist is probably credited. Also, in the actual article, in order to aleviate some of the WP:WHITESPACE, I would remove the two protraits of Christian IX and Louise in the background section as there are paintings of them given in the table below so. Once you're done sourcing the table information, please let me know! - Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b "Queen Louise". Amalienborg Palace. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  2. ^ "The History of Denmark 1875-1900". Amalienborg Palace. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  3. ^ "Christian IX". Royal Palaces. National Museum of Denmark. Retrieved March 17, 2024.

Articles created/expanded on March 19[edit]

Centurion C-RAM

C-RAM test firing at night
C-RAM test firing at night
    • Reviewed: [[]]
Created by Geardona (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

(Ping me)  On hold for merge discussion. Geardona (talk to me?) 04:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • I've watchlisted the article's talk page and will review this when it's kept.--Launchballer 10:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on March 24[edit]

2024 opening of regular sessions of the National Congress of Argentina

Javier Milei giving a speech
Javier Milei giving a speech
Moved to mainspace by Cambalachero (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 116 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Cambalachero (talk) 15:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC).[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 - The link is too long, even if it contains the article title; I recommend splitting it and only bolding "2024 opening of regular sessions" and linking separately to the National Congress of Argentina. An ALT hook that mentions why the opening was held later might also be good to have.
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Hook is interesting and the article is in good shape. I'll leave it up to the nominator or promoter to change the hooks in the way I suggested, but won't fuss over it. Added clarification tags where needed. SounderBruce 04:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 25[edit]

Bäckadräkten

Fredy Clue wearing the Bäckadräkten
Fredy Clue wearing the Bäckadräkten
  • ... that the Bäckadräkten (pictured) is Sweden's first unisex folk costume? Source: The title of this article about the Bäckadräkten is "Fredy Clue and Ida Björs Make History by Creating Sweden's First Unisex Folk Costume".
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/N661US
    • Comment: The owner of this photo has emailed Wikimedia to confirm release of the copyright; as I write this, that email is awaiting processing by Wikimedia.
Created by Dugan Murphy (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 13 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Dugan Murphy (talk) 17:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: Yes
  • Neutral: No - The article does not attribute the criticism of the costume, without which it is not possible to assess whether these sentiments are being given due weight. If the critics are important politicians, more weight would be necessary. If they are random Twitter commenters, it might not be necessary to even mention the criticism at all.
  • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: No - No text copyright issues detected. As to the images, though, looking at ticket:2024032510008305 (VRT only), there are unresolved licensing issues here.

Hook eligibility:

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Dugan Murphy: This is a great article. If this were a GAN I'd only have a few more things to say than I've said above. There's four Xs above, but only one that actually requires action on your part, a pretty straightforward NPOV fix. If the image copyright question isn't resolved by the time you've dealt with NPOV, I will put this on hold pending a VRT decision. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: Thank you for reviewing this nomination! I have added a few words to the Reception section clarifying who has expressed support and who has expressed opposition. The image copyright thing is still being reviewed, so unless there's someone else holding up this nomination, then we can put it on hold until VRT makes a decision. What do you think? Dugan Murphy (talk) 12:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the additional details resolve the NPOV issue. The VRT ticket is awaiting clarification from Mx. Clue as of March 26, so if you're in touch with them you might want to give them a nudge.  On hold for now. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 15:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Fredy Clue sent an email about 2 weeks ago, which is awaiting response. I started this discussion on the Volunteer Response Team discussion board to check in on progress. Dugan Murphy (talk) 11:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dugan Murphy: Peeking in with VRT goggles, I'm reasonably confident that resolution is imminent. Once you see the VRT tags go up on Commons, feel free to ping me and I can give this the tick of approval. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 19:57, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enchylium limosum

Enchylium limosum
Enchylium limosum
Created by Xkalponik (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

X (talk) 21:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • I'll review this. Article length and eligibility checks out, and is generally quite presentable. I see no evidence of copyvio. Out of all of these, I think ALT2 is the best; but I don't really see evidence that it "loves lime" beyond its name, and the article is a bit vague about what the "loving" portion of "lime-loving" means. Unfortunately, I think the other two hooks are lengthy and not very interesting to a non-specialist audience. Can you find any sources about why it's a lime-loving lichen? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:41, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comments:
@Generalissima, Hey thanks for reviewing the article. The term "lime-loving" in the common name "Lime-loving Tarpaper Lichen" refers to the preference of Enchylium limosum for habitats with alkaline or calcareous substrates. Limestone, which contains calcium carbonate, is commonly referred to as "lime," hence the name. Lichens like Enchylium limosum thrive in environments where calcium-rich minerals are present, such as limestone or dolomitic rocks. This particular fact is mentioned throughout the sources that are used in the article. Common names given to species are pretty much self-explanatory in most cases, including this one. These sources, although not particularly about the article's subject, will give an idea of why such species of the genera are called "lime-loving." 1, [2].
Sources that mention Enchylium limosum's calcareious habitat and common name are abundant and used throughout the article hence I felt it's redundant to mention them here.
I hope I was able to provide some ideas. Let me know if you have other questions/suggestions. Regards.
Edit: If you feel necessary, I can try to add more information explaining/shedding some background behind its common name in the etymology/taxonomy section. X (talk) 08:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COSMOS field

The COSMOS field, taken by the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope
The COSMOS field, taken by the Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page. ᵀʰᵃᵗ ᵒⁿᵉ ᵈᵘᵈᵉ ʷʰᵒ ᵐᵃᵈᵉ ᵃˡˡ ᵗʰᵉ ˢᵖᵃᶜᵉ ᵃʳᵗᶦᶜˡᵉˢ (talk) 16:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment: I'm not sure if this is the right way to add a comment, but the information given above is largely incorrect. The COSMOS field is not one of the deepest images ever taken of the universe and it is definitely not the deepest Hubble image ever taken either. It is also not really accurate to say that it's one of the largest surveys of the universe ever. The esahubble.org page cited as the source doesn't make these claims either. It is one of the largest (maybe the largest?) contiguous fields ever mapped with Hubble, but that is different from the statements made here. Aldebarium (talk) 23:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


    • Still, most of the items listed above are incorrect. It is definitely not correct to state that this is one of the deepest images ever taken (either by Hubble, or more generally). There are many Hubble images that go deeper than this one. It is the largest contiguous survey field ever observed by Hubble, but that’s different from stating that it was one of the largest surveys of the universe ever. Partly this depends on what you mean by “largest”: if referring to angular area covered, other surveys like SDSS are vastly larger. Aldebarium (talk) 15:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I shall review this. Storye book (talk) 13:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[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: None required.

Overall: Thank you for this fascinating article. It has two issues, plus I think we still need final confirmation that the hooks are all true:

  • Two of the article's paragraphs contain no citations. They should at least have one citation at the end of each.
  • This bit is copyright violation (plagiarism). You need to either rephrase it completely and cite it, or put it unchanged in quotation marks and cite it: Is the Hubble Space Telescope's largest ever contiguous survey of the Universe and was carried out by an international team of 70 astronomers on July 1, 2013. In making the COSMOS survey, Hubble photographed 575 adjacent and slightly overlapping views of the universe using its Advanced Camera for Surveys' (ACS) Wide Field Camera. It took nearly 1,000 hours of observations. The distances to the galaxies were determined from their redshifts, using ESO's Very Large Telescope, the Subaru and CFHT telescopes in Hawaii and the Magellan
  • Please do the same with this one: covers a 2 square degree equatorial field, with spectroscopy and X-ray to radio imaging. Over 2 million galaxies are detected, spanning 75% of the age of the Universe.
  • Aldebarium Please would you kindly confirm that the above hooks are now all true?

When the above issues are resolved, This nomination could be passed.

Positive notes
  • I have copyedited the article, but that does not affect DYK.
  • According to DYK check, the article was created on 25 March. According to the article history, it was nominated n the same day (so no problem with timing).
  • Normally, an image like the one above would fail DYK assessment, because a glance at the thumbnail version says that it is just a black square. However in this case, I believe the public will understand that you have to click on it because it is obviously a night sky with stars in it. Storye book (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • All issues have been fixed as of now. MemeGod ._. (talk) 12:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The listed information appears correct now, except for the final point about “identified galaxies". I don’t think that the statement “over 200,000 identified galaxies” is really meaningful. What does it mean for a galaxy to be “identified”? This isn’t specified. The online catalogs contain measured photometry (magnitudes) and other information for a larger number than this, and according to the COSMOS web page at Caltech the data provide morphological information for over 2 million galaxies. The number of 200,000 seems to be taken from the COSMOS field article, and the citation for this fact in that article links to a paper by Darvish et al., but I’m not sure where exactly in that article the number 200,000 appears (if at all). In the paper (section 2) they say that their analysis used a sample of about 40,000 galaxies with accurate photometric redshifts, which is a small fraction of the total galaxy count in COSMOS. In any case, I don’t think that the concept of “identified galaxies” is really useful or meaningful unless a more specific definition is given and citation is found to back up this number. If that line is removed, the remaining information all looks ok. Aldebarium (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, Aldebarium and MemeGod27. I understand that the hooks are now acceptable, but I see that the article still has the contested phrase “over 200,000 identified galaxies” as a caption to the picture. Please could we have that removed, so that I can give the green tick? Thanks. Storye book (talk) 17:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, I just replaced it with "thousands of galaxies". Thanks :P MemeGod ._. (talk) 17:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, MemeGod27 for those corrections. However, now that those issues have gone, some other problems have become more visible:
* The paragraph beginning, "The area, corresponding" has no citation at the end. Please either provide a citation, or remove the uncited sentence.
* Earwig now finds two sections which must be rephrased to avoid copyvio: "Hubble Space Telescope has a narrow field of view, which is only a fraction of the angular diameter of the Moon.", and "covers two square degrees of sky. By comparison, the Earth's Moon is one-half degree across. The field is being imaged by most major space-based and ground-based telescopes".
* Note that the technique of copying and pasting material into an article, then trying to rephrase it in situ, just doesn't work. You always end up with sections of it which are unchanged. The best way is to read the source, then put it out of sight, and write the information in your own words into the article. If you tell yourself that you can write it more clearly and concisely, that usually works. Only proper names (words beginning with capitals) and short, common phrases, can be safely transferred into the article. If you really cannot rephrase a section, put it in quotation marks, with the citation at the end. Storye book (talk) 09:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done , I reworded the FOV part but just phrased the second one you pointed out, as there is no way I can reword it but keep the same integrity (and the source is cited and mentioned). I also added the citation that you mentioned. Thanks Storye book! :D MemeGod ._. (talk) 15:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you, MemeGod27 for rephrasing the first citation mentioned above. You had not dealt with the missing citation at the end of the para mentioned above, so I removed the uncited bit to the talk page. It can stay safely there until you can find a citation. Re the second citation: if you don't put it in quotation marks, it is still copyright violation even if you have added a citation. You still need to add quotation marks, because the phrasing itself is copyrighted. I have added the quotation marks for you, because we cannot just leave copyvio in the article. The article is now cleaned up, and can go forward.
  • Good to go, with ALT 0, 1 or 2, and the picture. Note to promoter: I believe that the readers will understand that a sky-at-night picture will look black as a thumbnail, but will be well worth clicking on, to see the stars. However, that is ultimately a matter for the promoter to decide. Storye book (talk) 17:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just one more comment- after reading through the COSMOS field article, I have to say that it is very poorly written, unclear and confusing in many aspects of its content, and contains some errors (such as the implication that the entire field was imaged in 1 day, which I will fix now). It would benefit from a complete rewrite. (not that I have time to do this, but the article is really not in good condition at present.) Aldebarium (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • . Thank you, Aldebarium. I have changed the green ticks to a "no", for the present.
  • Note to admin: Please give this nomination a set period of time for the article to have a full rewrite, before closing it down, in the hope that someone might re-write the article. Can you give it a month? Storye book (talk) 09:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 30[edit]

Mohammad Saifullah Ozaki

Improved to Good Article status by An anonymous username, not my real name (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Anonymous 16:48, 31 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - issue
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough, long enough, and is well-sourced, but the source used here has an issue (see Buxton comments below). Possibly hook could be improved (see comment below), a really interesting article John Cummings (talk) 19:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I changed the review status thanks to Bruxton for flagging the issues. John Cummings (talk) 19:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding this nomination. It is a BLP so I am cautious about promoting a hook that seems to imply guilt before conviction. Also the bit in the hook about him being an associate professor... it appears in the lead uncited. In the body it just says "He began teaching at Kyoto's Ritsumeikan" - since it is a hook fact it should be stated in the body directly followed by a citation. The hook is 197 characters so it is 3 under the limit, but also gives too much info. (I also made this reply at DYK). I think we need a new hook that because this is a BLP. Bruxton (talk) 19:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UT Rio Grande Valley Vaqueros football

Moved to mainspace by BeanieFan11 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 157 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • The article is all sourced and has no copyright issues. Regarding the hook, I suggest making the change in the article so that readers can see it and understand when it appears in the DYK. Other than that, the hook is good to go. - Toadboy123 (talk) 09:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note that I still have to do the QPQs... BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Without QPQs, this can't be given a tick. Giving more appropriate icon for present time. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 31[edit]

Exdeath

Moved to mainspace by Kung Fu Man (talk). Nominated by DetriaSkies (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

detriaskies 22:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • The article is new but not long, thanks to the presence of that maintenance template demanding a section expansion and a lede merely consisting of an opening sentence. It has an image licensed for fair use but lacks a suitable caption, as well as a few questionable sources, such as RPGamer (cite 14). Furthermore, no copyvio or plagiarism concerns (assuming good faith on non-English language sources) and the hook is cited and is fine. Nominator is exempted from doing a QPQ, but they should be credited on this DYK as the "nominator" as opposed to mainspace mover, who is actually User:Kung Fu Man (diff). Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 05:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't appear to be an expand template on this any more. Lede would still deserve {{lead too short}}, but updating icon.--Launchballer 18:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Articles created/expanded on April 2[edit]

Rodolfo Pallucchini

Created by Brudelman (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Brudelman (talk) 05:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Note: the nominator is currently blocked from new mainspace or category creations over concerns regarding competency; however, as they are not fully blocked I am not sure if this will affect the nomination or not. This is just something to keep in mind. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't blocked at the time, and can still edit the page, so should be fine. I'm a bit irked by the fact that none of the accessdates are recent, which implies that they've been copied from somewhere.--Launchballer 09:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: Looking at their talk page, it appears they have already received a warning for copyright violations. For what it's worth, while Earwigs gave a largely okay score, there are at least two sentences that are very close matches with another source, but I don't know if they're acceptable given they're relatively minor, or this still counts as a copyvio or close paraphrasing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:56, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's severe enough to warrant quick-failing/WP:G12ing, but something must be done about it. Pinging Brudelman for immediate attention.--Launchballer 10:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I merely copied and pasted the text for the Rodolfo Pallucchini article from its Italian language counterpart, its original sole article. Also, @Narutolovehinata5 I'm curious, what are access dates? Why are you irked that they aren't recent? Thanks.Brudelman (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Access dates are the date the reference was accessed, web pages sometimes change and they're useful for establishing which version is being cited. My beef is that older references are usually an indicator of "this has existed elsewhere", which could mean this is a split, which could affect eligibility per WP:DYKLEN. Translations are fine though, per WP:DYKNEW.--Launchballer 12:41, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it was based on the Italian article, then the translation must be attributed, either by using {{Translated|it|Rodolfo Pallucchini}} in the talk page, or by explicitly saying so in the edit summary. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has now been done. Full review needed.--Launchballer 02:05, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Might as well give this a preliminary review while I'm here. I think the main elephant in the room is that the current hook isn't actually all that hooky. It doesn't really make it clear why him being a director is such a big deal, nor would it catch much attention. There are also multiple uncited statements in the article, such as several entries in the Administrative positions section (which might work better in prose rather than as a list). The last sentence of the Career section is unreferenced, and is also missing a space before it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

World Central Kitchen drone strikes

Created by Makeandtoss (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 37 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Makeandtoss (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

My objection is now outdated. Events and sources are moving. starship.paint (RUN) 02:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.


  • Objection - the content in the hook three consecutive missiles fired by an Israeli drone cannot be presented in Wikivoice using this Haaretz source, which said that the information comes from Israeli defense sources. Haaretz has not independently reported the information (without attribution). starship.paint (RUN) 00:05, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Starship.paint: The same material has been covered in RS including NYT, Al Jazeera, BBC, and Bellingcat; and in visual investigations not just reporting articles. All RS have provided the same information about three missiles being shot. I don't see why information from RS requires attribution, especially given that all these RS agree on the same exact point. Makeandtoss (talk) 08:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They agree on the same point, but they don’t seem to have independently verified it. Perhaps something like “three separate vehicles” will be closer to having verified coverage? FortunateSons (talk) 09:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FortunateSons: They did verify it themselves -i.e independently- using visual data, please read the Bellingcat, AJ and BBC investigations. Makeandtoss (talk) 10:01, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source article links please. starship.paint (RUN) 10:08, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Makeandtoss: - you are assuming too much of the sources. (1) Bellingcat does not say three consecutive strikes, they simply say Israeli airstrike, Bellingcat cannot confirm that it was missiles or that they were even fired by a drone: Although not possible to be certain without fragments of the munition itself, the WCK vehicles bear the hallmarks of a precision strike by inert or low-yield missiles ... In order to successfully accomplish a laser guided strike it is necessary for a platform, such as a drone, to “illuminate” the target with a laser while the missile is launched. (2) BBC writes that the evidence suggests there was more than one strike, but this is not confirmation, BBC's experts also do not confirm that it was a drone strike: Chris Cobb-Smith, a former British Army officer and ex-UN weapons inspector, said the attack was probably the result of drone-launched Spike missiles ... Justin Crump, a former British Army officer who runs Sibylline - a risk intelligence company - agreed. He says the attack "was likely drone-launched and targeted". He added the strike had probably been caused by a missile, rather than a bomb or mortar. (3) Al Jazeera goes the furthest, their article text says The shelling targeted three vehicles belonging to WCK, one at a time, but if you read the article text, there is no mention of drone missiles, instead they say: Analysis of images of the second and third targeted vehicles showed signs of a projectile entering from the top and exiting through the bottom, suggesting that the cars were targeted from the air. Now, Al Jazeera's image does mention "drone strikes" and missiles, but I find it peculiar that they didn't mention (or even attempt to explain) it in the article text. The sources are simply weaker than you portray them to be. None of them confirm, all of them are simply suggesting / probably / likely etc. starship.paint (RUN) 11:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I suggest some edits to the hook to make it clearer what happened? I'd suggest something like Humanitarian and aid organizations suspended their operations in the Gaza Strip after seven World Central Kitchen aid workers were killed when their marked cars on a preapproved route were bombed by Israeli drones. I think its really important to make clear they were in marked cars, they were also on a route approved by the Israeli military. Makeandtoss what do you think? Also have any additional sources been published that would resolve the dissagreement above? If not maybe a third party could be involved to help resolve if the sourcing meets Wikipedia's rules. John Cummings (talk) 13:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that this is also nominated at ITN. It can only reach the main page through one of the possible venues. At this point, there isn't consensus to post to ITN, but that can change. Schwede66 02:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Starship.paint: @John Cummings: Thanks for commenting. Starship.paint, building on our discussion on the talk page, I think we can both agree to this ALT1 version: ... that the attack on World Central Kitchen convoy in the Gaza Strip, which killed seven aid workers, was likely a result of three consecutive missiles fired by an Israeli drone? Makeandtoss (talk) 14:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I can add anything more than what starship.paint and John Cummings have said. Any hook we run on this topic should be widely supported across a cross section of media, and be independently verified. Otherwise its likely to be challenged at Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. We need a hook that won't get pulled. John made some good suggestions.4meter4 (talk) 02:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Makeandtoss, 4meter4, John Cummings, and Narutolovehinata5: I've hatted my objection above due to recent events: the IDF's admission, which I believe supports this hook: starship.paint (RUN) 02:54, 6 April 2024 (UTC)@FortunateSons: - forgot to ping. starship.paint (RUN) 02:58, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Starship.paint: Thanks for the ping, I agree that the objection is now out of date. FortunateSons (talk) 07:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT2 ... that the Israel Defense Forces have accepted responsibility for killing seven World Central Kitchen aid workers in targeted drone strikes that destroyed the aid workers' cars, one by one? Source 1: Associated Press Source 2: CBS News Source 3: BBC News starship.paint (RUN) 02:54, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would be ok with this as long as there are no objections to featuring violent content at DYK. There has been some pushback of late against featuring potentially disturbing hooks. That said, this hook appears to have wide support in media, and is so widely reported I don’t think an argument for censoring would be successful.4meter4 (talk) 02:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, our main page constantly features potentially disturbing content, so I don't see why this can't be, either. Right now, our ITN section: A severe earthquake strikes near Hualien City, Taiwan ... In Syria, an Israeli airstrike kills 16 people at the Iranian consulate in Damascus, including brigadier general Mohammad Reza Zahedi ... A bus falls from a bridge in Limpopo, South Africa, killing 45 people ... The Francis Scott Key Bridge in the U.S. city of Baltimore collapses after being hit by a container ship. starship.paint (RUN) 06:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DYK and ITN have different goals. In addition, the issues with IP hooks have never really been about violence but rather tone and POV. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One might consider, is the problem Wikipedia's "tone and POV", or does the event inherently make one side look bad? I'd say the answer is provided by the BBC: There are also moments, like the last few days in the Middle East, when events leave belligerents and their allies at a crossroads with big decisions to make ... The killing of foreign aid workers in Gaza might finally exhaust the considerable patience of Israel's allies, led by the United States. and Reuters: the killing of a group of aid workers by an Israeli air strike summed up both the dire humanitarian crisis and the lack of a clear way out of a conflict that is leaving Israel increasingly isolated. The attack on Monday night that killed seven staff of the World Central Kitchen (WCK) aid group, including six foreigners, has angered even some of Israel's closest allies, adding to growing pressure for an end to the fighting. starship.paint (RUN) 07:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Starship.paint: ALT2 doesn't really sound interesting, but more like a news headline; do you have any other alternatives? Makeandtoss (talk) 10:15, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Makeandtoss I don't think it's going to be possible to run a different kind of hook without being accused of trivializing the event. This would probably pull the hook into Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Optics for an event like this are going to force us to keep the main event front and center in the hook. As such I don't see there being any meaningfully different hooks passing DYK review. Alt2 is probably our best option.4meter4 (talk) 12:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An admission to killing seven aid workers in targeted strikes ... not interesting?! It is no less interesting than the originally proposed hook, Makeandtoss. starship.paint (RUN) 12:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Starship.paint: @4meter4: If there is support for ALT2 then I would go for it. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:55, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Approving hook ALT2 per WP:CONSENSUS opinion. Article appears to be compliant with all DYK review criteria (newness, length, inline citations, NPOV, etc.) Hook fact is widely supported and independently verified in many sources. Promoter will need to check whether this gets featured at ITN. If it does, we can't feature it at DYK because it will have already been on the main page.4meter4 (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not so fast. This article has been moved twice in the last 24 hours. It should probably stabilise first.--Launchballer 13:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet, the Israeli explanation of events hasn't been fully added to the article. I didn't have time to do it yesterday. But, I can probably add it now. starship.paint (RUN) 13:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is stable and was moved without consensus. As for the Israeli explanation of events, its already in the article, the expansion of it doesn't affect moving forward with the DYK anyway. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Makeandtoss Page moves whether with or without consensus are a clear sign of instability. I would suggest not getting in a back and forth over issues like this, because if you argue its only likely to tank the DYK approval. @Launchballer I hear you, but from a DYK reviewer standpoint this is ready to go. There's nothing more on our checklist for the reviewer to do, and the nominee has done everything they need to do. Obviously, the promoter will need to evaluate stability because it is a current event. Due to the backlog there will be a natural signigicant delay anyway before this gets put into prep. I think it best that we leave it to the promoter to determine when its stable enough to move it into the queue. That's not something we need to worry about from the DYK evaluator standpoint. We can trust in the promoting admin to evaluate that. If it hangs out in the approved hook area for a while everything should be fine.4meter4 (talk) 13:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@4meter4: There is no back and forth here; I reverted the latest page move because it was undiscussed and because multiple editors on the talk page agreed as well. The article is stable but one or two more days of waiting will not hurt as you said. Makeandtoss (talk) 13:31, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, Makeandtoss, the article's Israeli explanation is incomplete. This will become apparent when I add the content (I am writing it right now). starship.paint (RUN) 13:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. starship.paint (RUN) 13:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both of you need to quit or I will have to pull the DYK tick. The article has had some instability issues as is typical of a current event. The article is likely to be edited heavily as new information is released. Any promoting admin will need to monitor the stability of the article before promoting. This means that if there are content disputes, edit wars, page moves, etc. the article will have to remain in the approved section until all that settles. I would suggest a minimum of two weeks of calm (ie no content reversions in the article's editing history, no arguments on the talk page, no page moves) before the article is featured at DYK. Best.4meter4 (talk) 13:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the concerns about stability above and the other issues, it probably wouldn't be safe to mark this as approved until at least a couple of weeks from now. Once the article has stabilized, it can probably be given a fresh look. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 3[edit]

Bayron Matos

  • ... that the first English known by National Football League prospect Bayron Matos was "I'm hungry"? Source: USF (Matos speaks with swaggering confidence. It's a little different than his first few weeks in America. Upon arrival, he didn't know English and tried a few phrases through Google translator. The only thing he knew how to say was, "I'm hungry.")
Created by BeanieFan11 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 159 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Somehow this is the oldest unreviewed nomination, so I'll take it. This is long enough, new enough. Hook short enough, interesting, and cited to South Florida Bulls' website. No maintenance templates found and no copyright complaints or neutrality concerns. You need two QPQs for this (and judging by T:TDYK, quite a few others); if you're genuinely struggling that badly, there's a pile at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Spare reviews for donating, and I suggest that you help yourself.--Launchballer 14:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clean (2022 film)

  • ... that 2022 Australian documentary film Clean, centered on the life of Sandra Pankhurst, was released after her passing?
  • ALT0a: ... that 2022 Australian documentary film Clean, centered on the life of Sandra Pankhurst, was released after her death?
Improved to Good Article status by MaxnaCarta (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 12 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 09:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Everything looks to be in order, but I would like you to consider a slightly more interesting hook. I would encourage at least some detail as to know Sanda Pankhurst was and what the documentary's themes were. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about "... that 2022 Australian documentary film Clean, centered on the life of Sandra Pankhurst (a former sex worker, drag queen, and crime scene cleaner), was released after her passing?". Dunno, I would be open to suggestions on how to improve it. I thought it was best to focus on one thing: the fact she died before her own film was released. This person was the epitome of interesting, but I don't want to bring too much into a short hook. Ideas? PbrittiMaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You definitely can't put the word "passing" onto the main page as per MOS:EUPHEMISM. Schwede66 02:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very interesting documentary about a very interesting person. Thank you, MaxnaCarta (talk · contribs)! I made some copyedits to the article. Except for the citation requirement, the article meets DYK requirements. The "Synopsis" section is unsourced. If Sandra Pankhurst were still living, citations would be necessary to comply with WP:BLPSOURCES. But as she has been dead for at least two years, WP:BLP does not apply.

From Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction#Sourcing and quotations, "The plot summary for a work, on a page about that work, does not need to be sourced with in-line citations, as it is generally assumed that the work itself is the primary source for the plot summary." However, Clean is a documentary, not a work of fiction, so that guideline is not fully applicable. To err on the safe side, I recommend adding sources to that section so that there is no question that WP:DYKCITE is met. Sourcing is needed to comply with DYK guidelines since the information about her being "a former sex worker, drag queen, and crime scene cleaner" is not sourced in the article. WP:DYKCITE says, "The facts of the hook in the article should be cited no later than the end of the sentence in which they appear."

The lead contains information that is not sourced in the body of the article. For example, the release month in "Clean was released in Australia in June 2022" is unsourced. The sentence "It was nominated for two awards at the Australian Academy of Cinema and Television Arts Awards in 2022" is unsourced also. I recommend going through the lead to confirm that everything is sourced (or is mentioned in the body of the article and is sourced there).

Here is an alternative hook that tightens MaxnaCarta's proposed alternative and removes the euphemism:

... ALT1: that the posthumously released documentary Clean centered on the life of Sandra Pankhurst, a former sex worker, drag queen, and crime scene cleaner?

As I am proposing an alternative hook, Schwede66 or another reviewer will be needed to review the wording. Cunard (talk) 09:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hook is sourced to the plot section, which technically doesn't need it per WP:PLOTCITE. I'm going to say that WP:DYKHFC overrides this and say that 'for the hook, you need a cite'.--Launchballer 09:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MaxnaCarta: Please action this.--Launchballer 10:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 4[edit]

Dick Harris (center)

Created by BeanieFan11 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 160 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Newly written, long enough, cited throughout. The ironically titled "Professional career" section details the four times that he was drafted, and yet didn't play professionally. I think I like ALT1 the best. ALT0 is a bit clunky. ALT2 is fine. QPQs are pending. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Ross (Suits)

Moved to mainspace by OlifanofmrTennant (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 8 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 22:38, 6 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Full review to follow, but I'd like to see more hook proposals before proceeding. I'm not that big of a fan of ALT0 as currently written as it requires reliance on familiarity with Suits, and ALT1 isn't really that interesting either. My suggestion would be to propose a hook or multiple hooks targeted towards those who may not know anything about the series. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's a much better hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 06:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was about to continue the review, but I noticed that there are still several incomplete sentences or writing in the article. Multiple sentences in the article, for example the last sentence of the lede, are lacking periods and seem to be unfinished. The article does meet newness requirements at least so it should be eligible for further review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@OlifanofmrTennant: Made a typo with the ping. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:10, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heike Heubach

Created by Moondragon21 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 7 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Moondragon21 (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Newly created article, long enough and sourced throughout, it appears to be written neutrally. Hook fact is interesting enough and sourced. The image is free to use, based on its license, and could be added to the nom. QPQ has been provided. There is some close paraphrasing in the following, please rewrite the italicized bits (also, I imagine there's a word missing at the end of "fixed place in the" and "As and when" is ungrammatical): As a parliamentarian, Heubach will have a fixed place in the, unlike most other lawmakers, with interpreters sat close to interpret speeches and her questions. As and when she makes her own speeches, an interpreter with a microphone will have a place next to the Bundestag's stenographers to interpret her speeches to translate for other lawmakers to understand. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pam Taylor

"The Unknown Airman", Plymouth Hoe
"The Unknown Airman", Plymouth Hoe
Created by AtticTapestry (talk). Nominated by Bogger (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 24 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Bogger (talk) 10:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • @Bogger and AtticTapestry: Needs more RS, the article has passing mentions and blog type sites as RS and they discuss the work not the person. Three sentences of the article are related to the person and they are supported with what looks like non-rs. I could not find much either...
  1. Here is a source
  2. Another source
  3. Another source
These are only passing mentions which are more about the works not the person. I wonder if this article should be redirected to the artwork with the three sentences merged. Bruxton (talk) 21:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • added those sources, including to hook -Bogger (talk) 11:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two QPQs are done, Earwig is 15% the hook is not very interesting but it is confirmed and in the article. Article is neutral and uses the correct inline citations. The UK has FOP for 3D so the image is ok. But again, this is really not an article about the artist so I am asking for another reviewer instead of rejecting the nomination. Bruxton (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

second opinion and full review needed. Bruxton (talk) 14:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bogger and AtticTapestry: I'm afraid this article needs work. If I saw that Works section outside of DYK, I'd be putting bullet points on it on sight, and I'm not even going to bother doing a character count on the rest, it's way under. Please convert that section into prose per MOS:EMBED.--Launchballer 13:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gambling in Georgia

  • ... that it will soon be illegal for government employees in Georgia to gamble? Source: "A new law, passed by parliament on December 22, forbids gambling for several classes of people, including those receiving government assistance, government workers, and anyone under 25." eurasianet
    • Reviewed:
Created by Casablanca Rock (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Casablanca 🪨(T) 16:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

I moved a citation to support the hook in the article - it was needed end of sentence. Lightburst (talk) 22:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus and Casablanca Rock: Another issue is the source for the hook says, "In response to the criticism, the implementation of the law was postponed from January 1 to March 1." One of our rules is that the hook must have facts that are not likely to change WP:DYKHOOK. Was the law implemented on March 1? If so this article and hook will not be accurate. Also per WP:DYKCOMPLETE this article needs to be developed. Lightburst (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lightburst, I will improve the sections as you've stated. The citation I had there was the best English language citation I could find, but there are more accurate Georgian language sources that explain more about the implementation of the law. It was delayed until June 1. The Georgian government released an update to the 2005 gambling law on the website of the legal corpus specifying the law going into effect on June 1. Sorry that this is a bit confusing, that previous article that has a lot of information about the law in English did not have the update of the law being delayed in implementation until June 1 instead of March 1. Please let me know if that source isn't good and I can try to find something else. There is an English language source that does mention the delayed implementation, but it is from a gambling industry news site. I cited it in the article itself, but I was not sure if that would be helpful/good for DYK. Casablanca 🪨(T) 14:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 5[edit]

Joe Gray (American football)

Created by BeanieFan11 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 161 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article passes creation and length requirements, both hooks work and contain a source. The article itself is adequately sourced, I would suggest changing "Portland, Oregon" to just "Portland" in the sentence "He moved to Portland, Oregon, when he was young." due to the state already being specified in the previous sentence, but the sentence itself may be an issue with its similarity to the source, not sure though. QPQs need to be finished, feel free to let me know once they are. Thanks! B3251 (talk) 20:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Axel Downard-Wilke

Axel Downard-Wilke presenting on Wikipedia's homepage while the homepage featured a video he was in
Axel Downard-Wilke presenting on Wikipedia's homepage while the homepage featured a video he was in
Moved to mainspace by Marshelec (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Marshelec (talk) 04:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Not "recent", per WP:DYKHOOK: "The hook should include a definite fact that is unlikely to change". Try "March 2024" instead. Otherwise, nice article (although I'm not quite sure how comfortable I am actually reviewing this, given I'm the one that put the hook there!)--Launchballer 08:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Amended hook. Marshelec (talk) 08:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Full review needed.--Launchballer 08:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm really sorry to be so anal about this, but there is an outside chance there could be more than one this year, so it should really give the month.--Launchballer 09:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the requirement, and could add the month, but in this case I believe the year is sufficient. As a member of the affiliate that organised the Wikicon, I know that this was the annual Wikicon - ie the only one for 2024. The next one is planned to be in Christchurch in 2025. See m:wiki/Wikimedia_Aotearoa_New_Zealand#Activity:_Annual_National_WikiConference for verification.Marshelec (talk) 06:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Full review needed.--Launchballer 07:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BlueMoonset This is the oldest fully unreviewed nom. Given that I put that hook on the front page, does WP:DYKRR prohibit me from reviewing it?--Launchballer 14:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Launchballer, it seems to me that you're involved. The nomination isn't even two weeks old; I wouldn't worry about "oldest fully unreviewed nom"; it will get picked up by someone else soon enough. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 6[edit]

On the German Republic

Created by WatkynBassett (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 21 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

WatkynBassett (talk) 13:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Long enough, technically a day over but I can IAR. ALT0 short enough, cited, and interesting. No neutrality issues found, no maintenance templates found, no copyright concerns found. But I do need to see two QPQs before I can approve this.--Launchballer 14:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 7[edit]

Mad honey

Spoonful of mad honey
Spoonful of mad honey
Created by Gobonobo (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 114 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

gobonobo + c 07:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • To be honest, I really don't understand the main hook or ALT1. Why are "giant" and "make" in italics? It kind of looks like the word order got scrambled. Pinging Gobonobo in case this is an accident that passed unnoticed. Oh , my bad, it's a joke, I didn't read the comment. But given that users reading the hook won't have the privilege of seeing the comment, this should probably be tagged with [Humor]. Cremastra (talk) 20:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Full review needed. Striking both original hook and ALT1; parentheses are not allowed as part of hooks (except for "pictured" and the like). BlueMoonset (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Long enough, new enough. ALT2 short enough, interesting, and AGF sourced (shame about the other two). No neutrality issues found, no maintenance templates found. There's one quote in the article which is two paragraphs, only one of which is cited; I say it's obvious that the cite covers both, so I would pass this, but for the presence of single-sentence paragraphs which should be expanded per WP:DYKCOMPLETE.--Launchballer 10:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I've added a reference to the first half of the quote and moved a sentence. I'm not sure which other paragraphs strike you as not DYKCOMPLETE, I think the only single-sentence paragraph now is the one on legality. I could find no other (reliable) sources addressing legality, though I think it worth mentioning that it is banned in South Korea. gobonobo + c 16:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the source, that could easily be expanded. I wonder if it's worth knocking it and the paragraph together into a general 'Usage' section?--Launchballer 16:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I could use some clarification. I'm not sure which paragraph you are referring to or which source. Is the issue a matter of how sections/paragraphs are arranged or is there an aspect that is not reasonably complete? This source mentions the 2005 ban in South Korea but makes no mention of legality in other countries. gobonobo + c 17:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Classy 101

  • ... that the Puerto Rican singer Young Miko initially composed "Classy 101" in Los Angeles and met the Colombian singer Feid by surprise there? Source: Antena3
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: I'm not sure if this is an interesting fact, but at least I'm trying.
Improved to Good Article status by Pollosito (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Santi (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Not a review, and I do my QPQs oldest first so I wouldn't get to this any time soon; you should consider integrating where Miko and Feid are from into the hook for interest purposes. Los Angeles is pretty big, it's not unusual for two people to meet there.--Launchballer 21:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for at least suggesting something, I'm a little nervous. I have already incorporated the suggested information; If another source is required, I will put it in, but at the moment I won't because DYKs usually only have one. I don't know if it's appropriate, but I hope you can move forward and get the help you need to find the healing you so desperately seek. I wish you success in everything you do, because I see that you are very good. Santi (talk) 21:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I forgot one more thing. I put this hook because in the interview given as a source Miko reveals that she was a big fan of Feid, so with this I concluded that it could be interesting. Santi (talk) 21:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I would suggest something like ALT1: ... that the Puerto Rican singer Young Miko featured the Colombian singer Feid on her single "Classy 101" after a chance meeting in Los Angeles?--Launchballer 16:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New hooks are proposed with new ALTs, previously existing hooks should not be altered.--Launchballer 18:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I have no more suggestions. So, I'll wait for another review (the template you used points that out) to improve. Anyway, thanks for reviewing and clarifying the process. Santi (talk) 18:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lewis W. Green

Lewis W. Green
Lewis W. Green
Improved to Good Article status by PCN02WPS (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 76 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:32, 7 April 2024 (UTC).[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: No - Not done
Overall: @PCN02WPS: Nice work on this article. The copyvio detector highlighted a few phrases, but they seem to be proper names or common phrases. Everything else checks out policy-wise. Just waiting on the 2 QPQs. Epicgenius (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 8[edit]

George Henry Jenkins

Jenkins in 1901
Jenkins in 1901
Created by ITBF (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 21 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

ITBF (talk) 11:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

YouTube Rewind 2018: Everyone Controls Rewind

Improved to Good Article status by Davest3r08 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Davest3r08 >:3 (talk) 16:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment I am not reviewing this but I believe that this nomination should be failed as a QPQ is not done at nomination time. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @OlifanofmrTennant: Ideally, a QPQ is done within the prescribed period of one week from the date of nomination, but WP:QPQ says it can be done before or after nomination as long as it's linked to its nom page and nominator has been duly informed that QPQ is needed upon a full review. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 05:07, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wouldn't use ALT1 for BLP reasons. Might I suggest a hook relating to it being the most disliked video of all time?--Launchballer 14:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT2: ... that within a week of upload, YouTube Rewind 2018: Everyone Controls Rewind had become the platform's most-disliked video of all time?--Launchballer 15:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That works. Davest3r08 >:3 (talk) 16:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Full review needed.--Launchballer 16:32, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 9[edit]

Elvio Porcel de Peralta

  • ... that after receiving his record 97th ejection, footballer Elvio Porcel de Peralta went to the referee and punched him? Source: several, e.g. references 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in the article
    • ALT1: ... that footballer Elvio Porcel de Peralta received a record 97 ejections in his career? Source: same
    • ALT2: ... that after receiving his record 97th ejection, footballer Elvio Porcel de Peralta attacked the referee and knocked him to the ground with a punch? Source: same
    • ALT3: ... that footballer Elvio Porcel de Peralta was ejected a record 97 times during his career, and after the final one attacked the referee and received a lifetime ban? Source: same
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/pending
    • Comment: Seems there's several ways of wording this; open to any suggestions to make the hook as "hooky" as possible :)
5x expanded by BeanieFan11 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 162 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Joanne McCarthy (basketball)

Improved to Good Article status by TonyTheTiger (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 364 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 10[edit]

Red Brown (politician)

5x expanded by Aneirinn (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Aneirinn (talk) 23:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: The article was not 5x expanded. It was 1534 prose characters pre-expansion and is currently at 3027 prose characters. This nomination could pass if the article is further expanded. Also, the source for ALT0 doesn't mention that this was the shortest Texas speaker term, just that his term was 7 days. There could be a second source added to provide all the information. Copyvio check fine. No QPQ required. ALT0 is more interesting in my opinion. Riley1012 (talk) 00:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 12[edit]

Napier Technical College (New Zealand)

Created by Panamitsu (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 37 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Panamitsu (talk) 10:58, 12 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Length, date, hook ref, close paraphrase check ok. Needs 2 QPQ though. --Soman (talk) 11:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Current nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on April 13[edit]

Frank Croxton

5x expanded by 4meter4 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 74 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

4meter4 (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Transgender archaeology

Created by Lajmmoore (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 95 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Lajmmoore (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Regine Rocks

Improved to Good Article status by Pseud 14 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 35 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Pseud 14 (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article was recently promoted to GA and no copyvio concerns, hook attributed to non-English source. QPQ done. But I suggest shortening the hook to:

Thanks.ZKang123 (talk) 05:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the hook ZKang123. No objection to suggested Alt1. Struck the first hook. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Le Moniteur Acadien

Created by B3251 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 7 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

B3251 (talk) 21:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Article is new enough, hook is properly sourced and interesting. Earwig did not detect any copyvios. Waiting for QPQ to be satisfied. Davest3r08 >:3 (talk) 00:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toy Town

Created by ResonantDistortion (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 8 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

ResonantDistortion 19:39, 13 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Unless the reader is familiar with Bonkers (and I doubt most of our readership is), the hook is not easy to understand, let alone catchy. I understand if the intention is "the hook is vague on purpose to encourage readers to click", but with the current wording it might just confuse rather than entice readers. Pinging Launchballer for possible hook suggestions given they're familiar with music articles and hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1: ... that "Toy Town" "almost destroyed" the happy hardcore scene, according to MC Magika?
ALT2: ... that the BBC Radio 1 DJ Kutski described the Hixxy and DJ Sharkey song "Toy Town" as "the definition of the UK hardcore sound"?--Launchballer 11:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the feedback Narutolovehinata5 and for the suggestions Launchballer. I did have a concern the initial proposed hook weas a bit too vague. I personally like Launchballers ALT1. ResonantDistortion 11:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for ALT1! I'm probably not the best person to review it as I've never heard of MC Magika before, but I don't think knowledge of the person is required to understand the hook so it's not a major issue. I've struck the other suggestions, so this can now receive a full review.

The Ugly Black Bird

Created by Piotrus (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 506 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 14:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Mabe Fratti

Created by Battleofalma (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Battleofalma (talk) 06:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • There are currently two major issues with the article. The first is that it is only 695 characters long, far below the 1500 character requirement. The second is that the hook does not meet WP:DYKINT; the hook is unlikely to be perceived as interesting to those who lack background in the subject. If the reader does not know who Ligeti is (for the record, I had never heard of him before this review), they wouldn't find the hook interesting or get the point. I'd suggest expanding the article further, above 1500 characters, and see if alternative hooks can be proposed. If you need help, I would suggest asking help from 4meter4 as he is knowledgeable about music articles. For the record, the first paragraph of the article is unreferenced, so that needs to be fixed. No close paraphrasing has been found, and the nominator has less than five nominations so no QPQ is needed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have expanded the article. Sorry I thought the hook was interesting but I suppose a more accessible hook is that Fratti, as a professional musician, still uses the same cello she was given by her school nearly twenty years later.Battleofalma (talk) 20:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the changes. @4meter4: Do you have an idea on how the cello angle could be worded? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:50, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5 The sources are much more in-depth than the current article. There's quite a lot of interesting personal information in https://pitchfork.com/features/profile/chasing-the-goblin-with-mabe-fratti-the-guatemalan-cellist-at-the-heart-of-mexico-city-avant-rock-scene/ for example. I find it interesting that Fratti's religious background initially limited her to classical and Christian music, but after losing her faith she got into playing rock-n-roll on her cello. That could be interesting as a hook if that content were added to the article. In general, I think the article could be expanded further with greater details from the cited materials. It's currently a borderline stub. I'd stay away from a Ligeti hook. Avant-garde music is well known inside music intellectual circles, but I don't think it's a name that is immediately recognizable to most people. The only people who will know it will be those who seriously follow 20th century avant-garde classical music. 4meter4 (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brandy Hellville & the Cult of Fast Fashion

Created by Ezlev (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 81 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 01:30, 13 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Thomas Figures, Michael Figures

Created by Muboshgu (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 529 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

– Muboshgu (talk) 00:25, 13 April 2024 (UTC). Both articles:[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 - I would go with ALT1. ALT0 might cause issues at WP:ERRORS because technically it was only two KKK members who were prosecuted, not the whole group.

QPQ: No - 1 remaining
Overall: @Muboshgu: Nice work. Everything looks good except for the QPQ. Epicgenius (talk) 14:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 14[edit]

Cosmic Ray (film)

5x expanded by Hinnk (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 39 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

hinnk (talk) 00:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • (Not a review) It looks like the book is specifically saying that it's the first short film to put a pop song over "silenced clips" (found footage?), not that it was the first short film ever to have a pop song as its entire soundtrack. The latter definition covers an awful lot of musical short films going back to the 1920s. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good catch, it was definitely nagging me how to accurately summarize that claim without basically quoting it directly. I think there were some similar claims made in other sources, so I'm gonna look through those again and see what the best way to approach that would be. As a fallback, there's the quote about the film "presenting the eyes for Ray Charles". hinnk (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • ALT1: ... that Bruce Conner's Cosmic Ray has been recognized as the first music video? Source: [13][14]
      • ALT2: ... that Bruce Conner conceived of his short film Cosmic Ray as "presenting the eyes" for blind musician Ray Charles? Source: Looking for Bruce Conner: "I felt that I was, in a way, presenting the eyes for Ray Charles, who is a blind musician…I was supplying his vision." hinnk (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Philomena Franz

Created by Lajmmoore (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 94 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Lajmmoore (talk) 16:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

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

Overall: I would prefer more links and would suggest moving the bold link closer to the start of the sentence, but those are optional Lajmmoore. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cora Babbitt Johnson

  • ... that early environmentalists almost prevented the carving of Mount Rushmore? Source: Smith, Rex Alan (January 1, 1985). The Carving of Mount Rushmore. New York City: Abbeville Press. pp. chapter 2 and chapter 5; Fite, Gilbert Courtland (1952). Mount Rushmore. Internet Archive. Norman : University of Oklahoma Press; Merritt, Riley (2024-04-01). "Borglum's Horse Flies: The Early Opposition to Mount Rushmore". Honors College Theses.
    • Reviewed:
5x expanded by Borg Axoim (talk) and Crunchydillpickle (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Borg Axoim (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

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

Overall: The nominated article has one paragraph without a citation. The uncited paragraph could be supported in part by pages 11 and 121 of Mount Rushmore by Gilbert C. Fite, it talks about the Hot Springs Star's editorial stance. https://archive.org/details/mountrushmore00univ/page/121 I also suggest that an alternate wording like "that early environmentalists like Cora Babbitt Johnson almost prevented..." rather than the current wording.

Democratic Yemeni Union of Peasants

October 7, 1986 congress of the Democratic Yemeni Union of Peasants
October 7, 1986 congress of the Democratic Yemeni Union of Peasants
Moved to mainspace by Soman (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 377 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Soman (talk) 15:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Comment. Hi User:Soman - thanks for your work on the article. Any idea about the ultimate fate of the organisation – did it last until Yemeni unification in 1990? ITBF (talk) 10:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I can't find anything definitive, I would have presumed its history ended with unification in 1990. Unlike youth organization and trade unions that continued post unification, it appears that Afid was comparatively weaker and would not have endured without state patronage. But looking here https://www.adengad.net/news/693324 and https://www.addalinews.com/Print/16352 there are mentions of a Peasants Union in the Southern movement... unsure if there is any organizational connection. For the purpose of this article I think we can end the article history with 1990 for now, though. --Soman (talk) 11:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nighat Arif

Created by Launchballer (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 216 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Launchballer 12:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • I've simplified ALT2 to make it snappier; see ALT2a. If you like it, I suggest you amend the article to use the phrase "medical reasons (which really is just a summary of your longer hook). Schwede66 18:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Launchballer 18:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 15[edit]

Charlize Mörz

5x expanded by Riley1012 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 27 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Riley1012 (talk) 00:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Roman roads in Judaea

  • ... that Roman roads in Judaea were used to roam the land? Source: Did you know that some Roman roads in Judea are still in use to this day?
    • Reviewed:
Created by Owenglyndur (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Owenglyndur (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: No - Source not provided for the hook, the "source" appears to be an alternate hook?
  • Interesting: No - That roads were used to roam the land is... obvious, not remotely interesting. That Roman roads are still used today is more interesting, but needs a source to support such a hook. The section "Roads in use today", contains no sources at all.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: This nomination still needs work. As it's your first nomination, I'm happy to give you time to improve this. But, at minimum, you need to settle on an interesting hook with a reliable source that you can clearly cite for it. Unsourced sections need to either be removed, or reliable sources cited inline with them. Grnrchst (talk) 13:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Suggestion: if you find a source for current use of the same routes, that might be interesting (enough)? FortunateSons (talk) 17:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Estoppey D-series

  • ... that the Army Air Corps were so unimpressed by the Estoppey D-8 that one member stated he would rather use nails and a wire? Source: McFarland, 141
    • Reviewed:
Created by Maury Markowitz (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 196 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article definitely long enough and presentable (although is almost entirely sourced to one source, so introducing other sources would probably be advisable.) The hook is verifiable by searching "nails and wire" on the Google Books page. Still needs the QPQ for official sign off, of course. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 23:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, as written, this would deserve {{more sources needed}}, so definitely needs more sources.--Launchballer 10:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 16[edit]

The Strange Death of Captain America

Created by Morgan695 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 163 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Morgan695 (talk) 22:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Simone Murphy

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 219 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Launchballer 15:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Global dimming

Improved to Good Article status by InformationToKnowledge (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

InformationToKnowledge (talk) 08:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • Not a review, and I do my QPQs oldest first so would not get to this any time soon (but would not object to any other editor jumping in ahead of me); if I saw that hook in prep, I'd truncate it at "methane" per WP:DYKTRIM.--Launchballer 20:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 17[edit]

Hajoti miⱨati

Created by Soman (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 378 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Soman (talk) 09:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Bedok Reservoir MRT station

  • ... that Bedok Reservoir MRT station features a public artwork including a message that "dribbles down" the lift shaft in motifs of droplets? Source: Zhuang, Justin; Soh, Darren (2022). Art in Transit: Downtown Line Singapore. Singapore: Land Transport Authority. ISBN 978-981-18-3967-2. OCLC 1342054525. (p168)
Improved to Good Article status by ZKang123 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 14 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

ZKang123 (talk) 05:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: The guideline WP:INTEXT advises that In-text attribution may need to be used with direct speech (a source's words between quotation marks or as a block quotation)... It seems DYK allows leeway for this not to be in the hook, but a reader should be able to see in the article where the quote came from. It also avoids the appearance of a WP:SCAREQUOTE. Alternatively, is paraphrasing an option? I don't have access to the source; is it possible to provide a relevant excerpt here for review? Otherwise, I'll WP:AGF. —Bagumba (talk) 11:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Obonga-Ottertooth Provincial Park

Created by P199 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 36 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

P 1 9 9   19:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Azahriah

5x expanded by Xia (talk) and Mikoczi (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Xia talk to me 18:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 18[edit]

Le Touquet

5x expanded by Szmenderowiecki (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 9 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Szmenderowiecki (talk) 16:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Prunus jamasakura

Created by Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 65 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 05:51, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929–1945

5x expanded by Hydrangeans (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 16 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Gherardo Gambelli

Created by Bloom6132 (talk) and Rutsq (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 258 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Bloom6132 (talk) 21:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • @Rutsq: good suggestion. Please feel free to suggest any other ALT hooks. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:05, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zapad 2009

5x expanded by Piotrus (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 507 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Matthew Charles Johnson

Moved to mainspace by GMH Melbourne (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

GMH Melbourne (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Full review needed.--Launchballer 06:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 19[edit]

Bed of nails defense

  • ... that in order to protect the Minuteman missile silos from attack, Richard Garwin proposed using a bed of nails? Source: Garwin
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: quite possibly the strangest yet also illuminating articles on cold war politics
Created by Maury Markowitz (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 197 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Butterfly Theater

Butterfly Theater at night (1911)
Butterfly Theater at night (1911)
Moved to mainspace by Lightburst (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 22 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Lightburst (talk) 23:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Horvat ’Eqed

A fortified gate dating from the 2nd century BC at Horvat ’Eqed, possibly built by Seleucid general Bacchides
A fortified gate dating from the 2nd century BC at Horvat ’Eqed, possibly built by Seleucid general Bacchides
  • ... that the fortifications of Horvat ’Eqed may have been constructed by the Seleucid general Bacchides as part of his efforts to suppress the Maccabean Revolt? Source: Hizmi, Hananya; Haber, Michal; Aharonvich, Evgeny (2013). "From the Maccabees to Bar Kokhba: Evidence of Fortification and Revolt at Khirbet el-'Aqd: The Results of the Renewed 2012 Excavations". New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem. 7: 6–24.
    • ALT1: ... that Horvat ’Eqed, a fortified ruin nestled in the Judaean Mountains, may have served as a major stronghold during the Bar Kokhba revolt? Source: Hizmi, Hananya; Haber, Michal; Aharonvich, Evgeny (2013). "From the Maccabees to Bar Kokhba: Evidence of Fortification and Revolt at Khirbet el-'Aqd: The Results of the Renewed 2012 Excavations". New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem. 7: 6–24.
    • ALT2: ... that excavations at Horvat ’Eqed uncovered coinage and hiding complexes dating from the Bar Kokhba revolt, as well as arrowheads, armor scales, slingshots, and ballistae? Source: Hizmi, Hananya; Haber, Michal; Aharonvich, Evgeny (2013). "From the Maccabees to Bar Kokhba: Evidence of Fortification and Revolt at Khirbet el-'Aqd: The Results of the Renewed 2012 Excavations". New Studies in the Archaeology of Jerusalem. 7: 6–24.
    • Reviewed:
Created by Mariamnei (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Mariamnei (talk) 20:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

155 Mercer Street

155 Mercer Street
155 Mercer Street
  • ... that firefighters were alerted to a fire in their fire station at 155 Mercer Street in Manhattan by a ring-tailed monkey named Jenny throwing billiard balls down a flight of stairs? Source: "One time she woke the sleeping company to a fire in its own building by throwing billiard balls down a flight of stairs." [17]
Moved to mainspace by Found5dollar (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 19 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Found5dollar (talk) 19:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: hinnk (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dadang Supriatna

Created by Juxlos (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 216 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Juxlos (talk) 11:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
  • Cited: Yes - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Yes

QPQ: No - Not done
Overall: @Juxlos: Nice work. I'm just waiting on a QPQ. Epicgenius (talk) 14:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jonny Pelham

5x expanded by Launchballer (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 221 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Launchballer 10:54, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Terrance (octopus)

Photograph of an Octopus bimaculoides.
Photograph of an Octopus bimaculoides.
Created by Yug (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Yug (talk) 🐲 10:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is new enough, long enough, is well sourced to news outlets, and it plagiarism free. There are two notes in the article that need addressing: one "who?" after 'commenters' - please be specific. Also there is a [citation needed], please add a reference. No QPQ is required. Hook is cited, but I'm not sure it is the most interesting option? The striking thing seems to be the connections between the octopus and Tiktok, so perhaps that could be an alternative hook? Picture is free, and the background is clear, but the actual octopus (which is isn't Terrance) is quite blurry. Overall a nice article, thank you! Lajmmoore (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 20[edit]

Rhynchocyon

  • ... that a new subspecies of giant sengi was recently discovered? Source: "Despite the pelage differences, initial DNA comparisons found it nearly identical to R. chrysopygus. A later DNA comparison supported a designation of a new subspecies, Rhynchocyon chrysopygus mandelai as it diverges in pelage and is allopatric to R. chrysopygus (Agwanda et al. 2021)."
    • Reviewed:
5x expanded by Azcolvin429 (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 02:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Erik Sparre

A 1595 painting of Sparre, holding his treatise Pro rege, lege et grege
A 1595 painting of Sparre, holding his treatise Pro rege, lege et grege
Created by ThaesOfereode (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

ThaesOfereode (talk) 02:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

September 2023 New York floods

Created by Tails Wx (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 21 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:29, 20 April 2024 (UTC).[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: No - Not done
Overall: Well done on the GA review @Tails Wx :) preference for ALT1. Nothing else of note, really. Just ping me if the QPQ is done. ‍  PSA 🏕️  (talk) 07:21, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[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: [19]; discussion setting the six week limit can be found here: [20].
April Fools' Day hooks are exempted from the timeline limit; see Wikipedia:April Fool's Main Page/Did You Know.