Template talk:Did you know

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

There are currently 6 filled queues – all good, for now!

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

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

Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
March 6 1
March 15 1
March 20 1
March 21 1
April 1 1
April 4 1 1
April 5 1
April 7 3
April 8 1 1
April 9 1
April 10 2 1
April 11 4 1
April 14 4 1
April 15 7 4
April 16 1
April 18 1
April 19 2 1
April 20 4 1
April 21 2 1
April 22 1
April 23 4
April 24 2 1
April 25 1
April 26 3
April 27 3 2
April 28 2 1
April 29 5 2
April 30 3 1
May 1 5 2
May 2 7 1
May 3 1 1
May 4 1
May 5 8 3
May 6 9 2
May 7 3 1
May 8 5
May 9 5 2
May 10 2
May 11 4
May 12 3 2
May 13 4 1
May 14 2
May 15 1
May 16 7 5
May 17 7 4
May 18 7 1
May 19 4 2
May 20 3 3
May 21 6 2
May 22 5 3
May 23 5 3
May 24 6 1
May 25 5 1
May 26 6 1
May 27 7 2
May 28 7 3
May 29 7 1
May 30 3 2
May 31 6 3
June 1 5
Total 219 71
Last updated 21:37, 1 June 2023 UTC
Current time is 23:01, 1 June 2023 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

Shortcut

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

Further information: Official supplementary guidelines and unofficial guide

Nominate an article

Frequently asked questions[edit]

How do I write an interesting hook?

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

When will my nomination be reviewed?

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

Where is my hook?

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

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


Instructions for reviewers[edit]

Main page: Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewing guide

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

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

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

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

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

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

Advanced procedures[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to remove a rejected hook[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

Nominations[edit]

Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on March 6[edit]

Nick Acocella

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

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

  • Symbol question.svg @Thriley: New enough and barely long enough at 1540 characters, but it reads shorter than it is because of all the choppy sentences. The TV show is legitimately interesting as a hook and checks out. Have you tried using Newspapers.com? It's now in the WP:TWL bundle for qualified editors. It has good paper density in New Jersey, and I'm finding articles like the one I've cited here.[1] I also clipped the newspapers.com version of a paywalled North Jersey Media Group article. I'd just like to see the article be less choppy and a bit richer before approving. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:49, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you very much for your review! I’ll flesh it out with some newspapers.com newstories. Best, Thriley (talk) 05:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Thriley: ping to remind – could the suggestions be implemented within a week? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 21:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol delete vote.svg without movement in the past week, I think it's probably time to close up this nomination. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 15:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I’ll fix it up tomorrow!!!! Promise. Thriley (talk) 16:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron and Sammi Brie: Thriley has made a few edits to the article. Have the concerns been addressed? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:03, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol confirmed.svg I think it's fine at this point. It's hard with the early life section which is what is the real choppy-reading spot. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:55, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Thriley: I concur with Sammi Brie about the choppiness: perhaps the prose can be improved so that it is not so perfunctory. I did a copyedit of the early life section. I will promote and hope that work continues on the prose. Perhaps a career section? and adding years to his teaching career? We have WP:DYKSG#D7 to consider. Bruxton (talk) 18:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg On second thought we do need to improve the prose and complete the bio. I moved a few refs out of the lead per MOS:LEADCITE. i am afraid this will get kicked back for WP:DYKSG#D7. Bruxton (talk) 18:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree. I should have some time tomorrow to sit back and flesh it out more. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've expanded it a bit. Working on it some more. Thriley (talk) 00:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've done some minor rewording myself if that helps.--Launchballer 18:07, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

References

  1. ^ Arnold, Laurence (March 7, 2000). "Hardball politics: Hoboken baseball writer publishes political newsletter". The Jersey Journal. Associated Press. pp. B1, B4. Retrieved March 23, 2023 – via Newspapers.com.



Articles created/expanded on March 15[edit]

Obviously 5 Believers

(
)

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

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

Hook eligibility:

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

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

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

  • ALT3: ... that in 1966 one of the Hawks (later known as the Band) played on "Obviously 5 Believers", which was later the name of a band (later known as the Hawks) who played on Obviously 5 Believers (2021)? Sources: Heylin, Clinton (2021). Heylin, Clinton (2021). The Double Life of Bob Dylan. Vol. 1 1941-1966, A restless, hungry feeling pp. 388–392.; Seaman, Duncan (August 26, 2021); "Stephen Duffy and David Twist on The Hawks: 'We weren't after world domination'". The Yorkshire Post.
  • ALT4: ... that "Obviously 5 Believers" by Bob Dylan inspired the name of a band featuring Duran Duran founding member Stephen Duffy? Sources: Petridis, Alexis (October 15, 2004). "Radio daze". The Guardian.; Seaman, Duncan (August 26, 2021); "Stephen Duffy and David Twist on The Hawks: 'We weren't after world domination'". The Yorkshire Post.
@BennyOnTheLoose: Alt3 could work but I do agree that a rewording is needed. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:27, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How about...
@Onegreatjoke: status report? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 16:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol voting keep.svg Alt 3 is good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BennyOnTheLoose: Symbol question.svg I can't verify in the article that the Hawks were later known as the Band? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
D'oh! I've added to the text, with a reference; let me know if this isn't suitable. Thanks, theleekycauldron. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From Heylin (2021), as it's an offline source: "Dylan rejoined the Hawks [in New York]... [for the next set of sessions in Nashville] he co-opted Robertson" (p.392) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 21:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BennyOnTheLoose: hmm, but what about the band changing its name to 'the Band'? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:56, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theleekycauldron: That's in the Guardian source which I had added: "the Hawks outgrew their leader. They hooked up with Bob Dylan in the mid-60s and by the end of the decade were superstars on their own who had renamed themselves the Band." Sorry this is a bit convoluted; the Heylin quote was intended to confirm that Robertson joined Dylan for the Nashville recordings (as actually the other Hawks didn't). 21:29, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on March 20[edit]

Rick Suder

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 17:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Rick Suder; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

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

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Hook as written doesn't really say anything and the wording is confusing. Did Redick and McNamara physically bump him? Why is it interesting that Suder was passed in the record books? I made some direct edits to the article and added ALT1 hook as an option for a more descriptive hook. Would also improve the inline citing of your sourcing in the article. -— Preceding unsigned comment added by Longhornsg (talk • contribs) 03:17, March 21, 2023 (UTC) --TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Personally I do not see the significance of mentioning JJ Redick and the others in the hook. Would it not be enough to say something like "at one point, Rick Suder was..."? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • My point is that Suder is less known than the other two people I mentioned, so it is sort of a big deal that it took a couple of much more famous people to bump him from the list.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:02, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That would probably not pass WP:DYKSG#C2, or at least the spirit of it. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:29, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't really understand your point, which I think is suppose to be guiding the structure of my hook presentation.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:45, 6 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think any of the proposed hooks are going to seem significant to readers unfamiliar with basketball and who don't know who JJ Redick is. That was the point I was making. If anything, their mention distracts from the main point and makes the hooks less accessible to general audiences (remember that we write even for audiences who aren't into basketball). It might be better to just leave their mentions out and just focus on the Top 25 thing without other names. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:21, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
JJ Redick is a surefire National Collegiate Basketball Hall of Fame for people who follow the sport. I.e., most people who know basketball, know him and would be intrigued by Suder's link to Redick. However, the mention of his name is not likely to detract attention from the hook of those who don't know the sport. I have presented an ALT3 and object to its use because it seems ridiculous to anonymize Redicks identity.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on March 21[edit]

Order of Excellence for Women, Order of Righteous Son of Sudan

( Review or comment )

Created by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 21:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Order of Excellence for Women; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • This is a two-article hook.
    • Order of Excellence for Women: Created on March 16, nominated in time. Article is below 1500 characters of prose. I could include the descriptions in the tables as prose, which would put it over 1500, but it is unsourced.
    • Order of Righteous Son of Sudan: Created on March 16, nominated in time. This article is long enough and sourced. The first paragraph in "Insignia" is unsourced, though.
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Hook fact is interesting enough. One QPQ is presented, but a two-article hook requires 2 QPQ. Please expand and source the women's article, source that part of the men's article, and provide a second QPQ review. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:10, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Muboshgu: added a 2nd QPQ. as for sourcing the description of the badge or the insignia of both Orders, I thought I did not need a reference similar to the plot of a movie or the synopsis of book as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film#Plot WP:NONFICTION, as the it included in the thing itslef, i.e., the picture of the badge. Hope I am not wrong to assume that FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:40, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Even if we assume that it doesn't need to be sourced along a film plot, the film plot doesn't count to the character count of the article (I believe) and those descriptions shouldn't count to the character count of this article, making it too short. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Muboshgu: would you mind citing the policy as I could not find it in the DYK rules at Wikipedia:Did you know FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:11, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Muboshgu and FuzzyMagma: To clarify things, it is at WP:DYKSG that states that plot summaries are exempted from the "needs a reference" requirement. As far as I am aware, there is no rule that plot summaries do not count towards the length requirement. I think you're confusing things here: if the summaries are in tables or templates, then yet they are excluded as they don't count as prose, but Plot section do count as prose and thus are counted in article lengths. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:27, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@FuzzyMagma: Re-ping due to typo in my original ping. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:28, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for that clarification. I did confuse it. Content in the table does not count to the character count, and so the women's article is too short. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:58, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Muboshgu: it does not count because you are using the script (which excludes tables and itemised prose) not because it does not fulfils the rules of length or any other rules. I can surely take the text outside of the box but it aesthetically does not look right. If you disagree, please then cite the policy that says prose inside tables are to be excluded FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:29, 22 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol voting keep.svg After re-reviewing DYKSG, I don't see what I thought was there. If this comes up as an issue when it's time to promote this hook into the prep area, we'll talk about it more then. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BorgQueen: issues with refs fixed. Other issues with inline citation were already discussed here FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:36, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@FuzzyMagma: BTW the edit you reverted was to format dates. Nothing to do with citations. BorgQueen (talk) 09:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BorgQueen: I undid my undo immediately once I realised my mistake. Sorry FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@RoySmith and BorgQueen: the hook can change to Khaki green which is a variant, it’s an army fatigues descriptor. The whole idea of the hook is to highlight the using of military colours for men and what is culturally perceived as feminine colour to women, although both recipients are civilians
The broken link can be found in c:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Sudan#Government works
Anyway, I generally hate to push back if experienced editors are not comfortable with the situation. So! if the hook was declined does that mean I can use the two QPQ somewhere else? 14:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg I'm marking this as rejected. It's not a matter of "we can call it Khaki green". You're looking at the color and making a judgement call as to what the color name is. There should be a WP:RS which says what it is. But, deeper than that, you're looking at the two awards and making a judgement call about the meaning behind why they made each award the color it is. That's WP:OR and/or WP:POV. As for the QPQ issue, I don't know where the rule is written, but I'm pretty sure QPQs from failed noms are not transferable. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:34, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
deeper than that, you're looking at the two awards and making a judgement call about the meaning behind why they made each award the color it is. what are you taking about! it’s good to be open minded but just keep it inside while doing that. It similar to the sky is blue; are you not familiar with the region we are talking about? Are pretend like this is open to interpretation! What are you talking about!. And this not here or there. It’s a green Khaki unless you are color blind and I want to go forward with this nomination unless you have a a clear reason.
You changed your reasons three times already! Do you have a problem with nomination from these regions? Or you just making up reasons to block this
1st you said not mentioned in the text, then shifted to citation, then the color is not Khaki enough for your and now accusing me of things that does not relate to fact!
Unlike you, I’m from the country and well versed with culture to make that judgement; and even if you don’t like my anecdote then stick to the facts and do your review professionally and don’t just make up things as you ago
I tried to be considered and respectfully but you clearly saw it as something else. What a stupid argument to block a nomination, go any find a new one as this one is not supported any of the policies you have cited!
plus you can reject the hook (if you outlined a problem with it) not the nomination, unless there is a a issue with the article. I can propose hooks until the cow comes and you can reject them but you can’t reject the nomination. How you became responsible of anything here is beyond me but please just do your job! ..FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:15, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@FuzzyMagma: Unlike you, I’m from the country and well versed with culture to make that judgement; and even if you don’t like my anecdote then stick to the facts and do your review professionally and don’t just make up things as you ago. Unfortunately, I have to agree with RoySmith here. Even if you are from the country or location a subject is from, using your own opinions as a source for information in an article counts as original research and thus is not allowed. WP:BLUE is not literally about colors, but rather the idea that obvious facts do not necessarily need a source. For what it's worth however, there is disagreement about what colors count and do not count as khaki, so it would be better to have a source and be safe than sorry. This isn't an anti-Sudan bias or an anti-Africa bias, it's a Wikipedia policy and would apply regardless of what country the subject was from. Even if the subject was from the United States and talked about a US subject, original research would still not be accepted even if the article contributor is from the US and can vouch for its authenticity or reliability. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:39, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: I will reply in points to make my argument more coherent
  • is the sky actually blue? That question might seem pedantic but this what we are discussing here. What is different between green and Khaki green? I did some colour analysis and the ribbon colour is not green. You can do the same. Open the image in Microsoft paint and let paint detect the colour and then compare it to green. It’s not green. But when you say the sky is blue do you do colour analysis to confirm this or you go by perception which has an element of bias. Saying Khaki green or green is both correct and factual but more correct is Khaki green considering the colour that was detected by Microsoft paint. I hope you can sense why I consider latching to my anecdote as the reason for a rejection was as stupid as saying “is the sky actually blue?”. But regardless, it’s Khaki green more than green (as a fact, at least for the picture light setting), and I don’t think I need a reference for what included in the work similar to WP:NONFICTION
  • My argument bias is for moving the goalpost and changing why the nomination was declined 3 times with 3 different reasons that was changed everytime it was challenged. So it need to be addressed within that context. And there is no policy against challenging such a behaviour and question the root of it, wether it’s implicit or explicit bias as I did not see any1 being rejected over Color vision.
  • I can still propose alternative hooks but I want to get to why the current one is being rejected FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:27, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your argument still does not change the fact that you declaring if it is khaki or not still counts as WP:OR. Indeed, doing color analysis by yourself would be a prime example of OR. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:31, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Computer monitors are notorious for having poor color rendition. People who actually care about color (artists, printers, professional photographers) use special tools to calibrate their monitors and the room lighting the monitor is being viewed under. If you're not doing that, then you're just guessing. This is why color matching systems like Pantone exist. If you go to a printer and say, "I want green", they'll look at you funny. If you say, "I want Pantone 15-0343", they'll know exactly what you mean. Also, different people perceive the same colors differently. The dress describes a classic example of this. I'm not an expert at military decorations, but I'd be astounded if there wasn't somewhere an official description of what the award looks like, including what color ribbons are used. That's what you should be using as a source for the colors.
I don’t think I agree with you as your definition of WP:OR can include paraphrasing. As for the 2nd reply, is that how you find out it’s green? Glad you settled on this reason. Anyway, it’s a dead end to continue arguing so below is an alternative hook
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg ALT1'll need a look-over :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One sentence related to Alt1 needs a citation. --evrik (talk) 03:05, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Evrik: fixed (the citation at the end of the paragraph was added to the end of the sentence were the tag was put) FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:16, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about this for Alt2:
  • Alt2 to honor those who help that their country, Sudan has a decoration for both women and men?
Thoughts? --evrik (talk) 21:43, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Actually I want to go back to AL0 with a change, ALT3: * ... that Sudan has a separate decoration for women (with a pink ribbon) and men (with a green ribbon)? Same source contains the description which is 1961 Sudanese law that instituted these orders and includes their discerption. All included in the article text and (in case you can’t see it) is referenced FuzzyMagma (talk) 22:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT3 is not suitable per WP:DYKSG#C9. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: ALT4: * ... that Sudan has a separate decoration for women, with a pink ribbon, and men, with a green ribbon? FuzzyMagma (talk) 11:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 5[edit]

Bob Lee (businessman)

(
)

Created by Thriley (talk) and ElijahPepe (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 15:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bob Lee (businessman); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Should his passing be mentioned? ("the late developer of Cash App"). But I do think that it should be rephrased like "had such exuberant energy playing water polo, that he was known as 'Crazy Bob'?". It reads to be stronger and less... boring? idk. SWinxy (talk) 19:11, 14 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

General eligibility:

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - The source uses the expression "unending energy" rather than "exuberant energy" and it may be better to use the former expression as a quotation.
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - Subject to my own comment, I agree with the comments by SWinxy.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Appears to be Symbol delete vote.svg as to nomination date. Otherwise, Symbol possible vote.svg. The lede should name the subject's mother if there's a reliable source for it. Her name was Nanette. The wording of the first par of "Early life and career" is a bit too similar to the source and needs to be altered somewhat. Additionally, the source is not cited and appears to be a blog of dubious reliability. Otherwise plagiarism appears to be not an issue. The other sources I checked substantiate the info for which they are cited, except the one for "In July 2001, while employed at Ajilon, Lee wrote a program for Microsoft IIS to defend servers from Code Red, at the time a rapidly spreading computer worm.", and that source is also a Wikipedia article, and therefore not reliable. Once the various issues have been addressed, I will review again. Bahnfrend (talk) 10:02, 23 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your review. I’ll fix the article up soon. Thriley (talk) 02:03, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bahnfrend: Per WP:DYKSG, a nomination that is late by a day or two is usually still accepted, particularly if there are no other issues and if the nominator still wants to pursue the nomination. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:28, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Still interested, for the record. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:49, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you are still interested, you need to address the issues as soon as possible, otherwise the nomination will be closed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol delete vote.svg Marking for closure due to a lack of response. Nomination can resume if the issues are addressed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:45, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think the article looks fine. I’m not really sure the things mentioned in the review are problematic and cause the article to be unfit for DYK. Thriley (talk) 01:03, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ElijahPepe: Any thoughts? Thriley (talk) 01:04, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm going to have to agree here. It's a fine article, especially given the recentism towards his death. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:09, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gonna ping Bahnfrend for their thoughts as they're the review. Isn't recentism a bad thing though? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The majority of the article covers his life, not his death, so WP:RECENTISM does not apply. Articles about Lee only started appearing after his death, so it's very easy to get carried away by his death itself. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: My thoughts are as set out above. Plagiarism, even if confined to part of an article, and inappropriate sourcing, are not trivial. The nominator hasn't addressed my comments yet. When that has occurred, I'd be happy to review again. I agree that the one day delay in nominating should be waived if the other points are fixed. I don't think that there's any problem of recentism. Bahnfrend (talk) 13:44, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Where do you see plagiarism? elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on April 7[edit]

United States documents leak of the Russian invasion of Ukraine(Neo-Nazi)

(
)
  • ... that classified documents of the United States were partially leaked onto a Discord server for the video game Minecraft? Source: NBC News
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: QPQ not needed.

Created by ElijahPepe (talk). Self-nominated at 00:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/United States documents leak of the Russian invasion of Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) ; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Symbol possible vote.svg ElijahPepe: What FormalDude said regarding maintenance templates. Otherwise, this is new enough and long enough. Hook short enough and sourced. No neutrality problems found, no copyright problems found. QPQ unnecessary. I'd like to see the maintenance template addressed before I approve this.--Launchballer 23:47, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lorenzo Carfora

(
)
  • ... that in April 2023, Lorenzo Carfora became the first footballer born in 2006 to start a match in an Italian professional league? Source: Translated and re-adapted from Italian: "Carfora is the youngest of all [these players], so much that he made his debut a month ago against Südtirol, having just turned 17! And in the latest league round, head coach [Roberto] Stellone played him from the start [against] Bari, allowing him to become the first player born in 2006 in Italy to make it to the starting XI."
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/John Green
    • Comment: I think it's notable enough, since the player has even "beaten" the better-known Simone Pafundi by achieving this feat. I must point out, though, that every single source I've used to justify this statement contains a slight error: they all state that Carfora is the first 2006-born player to start "in Italy", but he's rather the first one to do so in one of our three full-time professional leagues. In fact, it's very likely that other people already managed to do the same before him in the semi-professional tiers of the pyramid... On a side note, my QPQ review is not closed yet, but I hope we'll get it done soon.

Moved to mainspace by Oltrepier (talk). Self-nominated at 09:54, 8 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lorenzo Carfora; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Post scriptum: I've changed my QPQ submission, since I actually made a mistake by taking over Wembanyama's article (I had already reviewed it for GA status). Oltrepier (talk) 13:52, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
New enough, long enough. No neutrality problems found, no copyright problems found, no maintenance templates found. QPQ done. There's one unsourced section at the start of the International career section but that can quite easily be merged with the following sentence. The bigger problem you have is that Wikipedia prefers verifiability to truth; unless you have a source to say "full-time professional leagues", it can't really stand. I propose a different hook, something like
ALT1: ... that on 1 March 2023, Lorenzo Carfora became Benevento's second youngest player to feature in a Serie B match?--Launchballer 00:13, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Launchballer: Whoops, sorry for reading your reply just now... I've made a few more edits to the article, accordingly: thank you for your suggestions. You're right about that dubious statement, as well: the thing is, I couldn't check if Carfora was indeed the first of his class to make a start in all Italian leagues without the risk of original research (I'm quite convinced someone had achieved the same feat before him in the semi-pro tiers, though). Plus, many Italian media have the bad habit of not linking their sources, so the citations I used couldn't help me on that front, either. Anyway, that's perfectly fine.
I like the new hook, but in my opinion, it might be more interesting to address that he's the first 2006-born player to feature in a Serie B match, as I reported on the article. What do you think about it? Oltrepier (talk) 08:15, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good idea. I can't actually approve my own hooks, so I'll leave you to write it.--Launchballer 14:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 8[edit]

Articles created/expanded on April 9[edit]

Le Corricolo

(
)
A pizza maker in Naples in the 1830s
A pizza maker in Naples in the 1830s

Created by Alessandro57 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:06, 9 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Le Corricolo; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

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

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Gog the Mild (talk) 20:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • The image is not of the article's subject, nor mentioned in or relevant to the hook, and so I think this needs to be a non-image hook.
  • The section of prose in the article about a collaborator needs citing.
  • The hook is cited, but I am unsure that the source referred to is a WP:RS; I am open to persuasion. The source it is cited to does not cover most of what is in the text cited, ie, neither the quote nor the bit about socio-economic analysis. The source doesn't even name Le Corricolo. Crucially, it does not support "it contains one of the first literary accounts of Neapolitan pizza". It says (my translation) "The first mention of tomato on pizza dates back to ..." - a different thing. And the source does not contain "published in 1843" which you use in the hook.
  • The lead is very short - a single sentence, and seems to serve as the first sentence of the main article rather than be " a summary of its most important contents" which "stand[s] on its own as a concise overview of the article's topic" as required by WP:LEAD.
  • The hook is about Neapolitan pizza, which is not mentioned in the article.
  • It is possible that all of this could be cleared up within the deadline, so I am watchlisting this and notifying the nominator. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo @Gog the Mild: and thanks for reviewing! I'll answer step by step:
  • The title of the book is 'Corricolo' (a dialect word incomprehensible even to an Italian), a kind of Neapolitan tilbury, which was the carriage used by Dumas to visit Naples. On commons there are several prints and photos of the corricolo, and the corresponding category starts with the introduction of Dumas' book, so I think there is some relationship. Perhaps we could write neapolitan Corricolo pictured instead of pictured. We could also change the image to a more Dumasian one (on Commons there are a couple of better ones in this sense, with monk, lazarus, scugnizzi and other passengers, exactly as Dumas describes them);
Within the article the connection is clear. A reader of the hook will be baffled as to why a tilbury is pictured. If you want to propose an ALT with a different image, go for it; remember that the image has to be used in the article.
  • Citation added;
  • Here I am perplexed, because apart from the quotation about being one of the first literary accounts (which is implied by reading the whole article), the text says it all. I quote it here below in Italian.

La pizza è finita perfino nelle pagine di Alexandre Dumas (padre), ne Il Corricolo, una serie di racconti su Napoli del 1843. Attraverso la descrizione della pizza, lo scrittore francese offre una breve analisi socio-economica della città: “La pizza è: All’olio; Al lardo; Alla sugna; Al formaggio; Al pomodoro; Ai pesciolini. È il termometro gastronomico del mercato: aumenta o diminuisce il prezzo secondo il corso degli ingredienti suddetti, secondo l’abbondanza o la carestia dell’annata”.

Are you sure you did not click on another link? In any case, I have added three other links, one of which is the Italian Encyclopaedia (surely an RS) where I have also quoted the sentence referring to the testimonies, the second is an academic paper and the third is a blog, but it is interesting because it photographs the original text. Actually, that of Dumas in the Corricolo is the first literary testimony to the existence of Neapolitan pizza: regarding the year, on some sources you find 1835 (the year of his trip to Italy, on some 1841 (the year of the beginning of the publication of the book), , on others 1843 (the year of the end of the publication of the book)
I'm sure. I was referring to the source you provide in this template. Your additional references in the article resolve this.
  • You are right here, the lead is definitively too short, I have expanded it a bit.
Looks good. As the lead is meant to be a summary of the main article, everything in the lead should also be in the article - usually in greater detail. Could you check that this is the case?
  • Neapolitan pizza is mentioned towards the end of the article, before the quote, and as you can see from the references a not insignificant part of the book's notability comes from being one of the first sources on Neapolitan pizza, so this information is important.
Fair enough.
Symbol redirect vote 4.svgThat's all for now, bye. Alex2006 (talk) 13:01, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To summarise: I am waiting for your confirmation re the lead, you to do a QPQ, and - optionally - for you to propose an ALT with a different image. Or a completely different ALT which is relevant to this image. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hallo @Gog the Mild:, it's me again!
  • Lead is referenced;
  • QPQ is done;
  • About the hook, I changed the picture with one of a pizzajolo in Naples in the 1830s. What do you think about it? If you don't like, I have an idea about another one...
Symbol redirect vote 4.svgBye, Alex2006 (talk) 17:48, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Looking good. Nice image, needs a US PD tag. Change pizzajolo in the image caption to "pizza maker" - this is the English language Wikipedia. Likewise in the hook above. Nearly there I think. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:00, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, changed (but wouldn't be better "pizza baker"?)! Regarding the image, currently it has a {PD-old-100-1923} Tag. Looks like it is also valid in the US ("This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1928."). Is it OK?
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg bye, Alex2006 (talk) 20:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yep, adding "-1923" has fixed it.
  • I have taken "pizza maker" out of italics in the caption.
  • Symbol confirmed.svgNow GTG. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Alessandro57 and Gog the Mild: I have some concerns about close paraphrasing. The following sentence from the article jumped out at me: The book is an extraordinary blend of literature and of real life, allowing the reader to grasp the city in its bustle and history. This corresponds to the following passage from the source: Le Corricolo, extraordinaire mélange de littérature et de vécu, permet de saisir Naples dans son bouillonnement et son histoire. Google translation: "Le Corricolo, an extraordinary mixture of literature and experience, allows us to grasp Naples in its ferment and its history." Checking further, I found more similarities between the article and the above-linked source, eg. Dumas only stayed in the city for three weeks, but this time was enough for him to capture the essence of the city (compare Dumas ne reste donc que trois semaines dans la ville, mais ce temps lui suffit pour saisir l’essence de la cité). Some other passages, eg. the sentence beginning This explains the book's effectiveness... have been reworded enough to avoid close paraphrasing, but clearly offer opinions that should be attributed to the source rather than stated as fact. I haven't checked out the whole article, these are just examples of some of the issues I found. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Sojourner in the earth and Gog the Mild:, thanks for noticing it! I will check and when necessary paraphrase again the text and notice you when I am finished. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 11:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol redirect vote 4.svg@Sojourner in the earth:, please check if now it is better. Sorry for what happened: usually I check the text with Earwig, but sometimes the application "forgets" some sources. :-( Alex2006 (talk) 12:29, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Earwig only detects exact matches, so it doesn't pick up on close paraphrasing at all, let alone from foreign-language sources. I don't believe the changes you made to the passages I mentioned are sufficient; you have replaced some words with synonyms but the sentence structure remains the same. These passages (and others in the article that are too close to the sources) should be completely rewritten in your own words. See WP:CLOP#How to write acceptable content for more advice. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 20:05, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol redirect vote 4.svgIn this case Earwig's usefulness is very limited. Thanks for posting the essay about close paragraphing, now I get it (I hope). However, consider that some statements, such as those on the "sentimental consonance" between Dumas and Naples, are not characteristics of a single source, but are universal. I found them written everywhere, in French and Italian sources, ranging from 1950 to ten years ago. Can you please check again, @Sojourner in the earth:? Thanks! Alex2006 (talk) 09:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I appreciate your efforts to resolve this. Let me first address your comment on the "sentimental consonance". The idea that Dumas's personality was similar to that of the people of Naples, and that this contributed to the success of the book, may be stated in numerous sources (I take your word for it), but it is still an opinion, and as such should not be stated in WP-voice as fact. You've already fixed this particular sentence, but there are others like it in the same paragraph, such as This makes Le Corricolo a valuable and still irreplaceable guide to discovering the city. The relevant policy is WP:Subjective. To expand on the example given in that section, the article on William Shakespeare says "He is regarded as the greatest writer in the English language", but doesn't say he is the greatest writer in the English language, regardless of how many people hold that opinion.
    Tonal problems can be an unintended consequence of close paraphrasing. Your source is a critical review, but you are writing an encyclopedia article; the information must be organized and presented in a different way. With your latest changes to the article, you've again reworded some sentences, but I still don't believe you're fully understanding the problem. For example, the source says that Dumas's technique of shifting from one genre to another gives the reader the impression that they are boarding the corricolo and travelling alongside Dumas in his journey through Naples. This is not a simple fact that can be restated in different words; it is the creatively-expressed opinion of the author. As long as these two ideas are linked together, i.e. that the shifting of genres creates an immersive experience, you are engaging in close paraphrasing. I don't have the expertise to say whether your latest alteration of that passage takes the text far enough away from the source to be non-problematic from a legal point of view; but the text still expresses a non-neutral opinion which should have in-text attribution.
    To be blunt, I don't believe that extensive close paraphrasing can ever be "fixed" except by erasing the article and starting again. It introduces so many problems, and once you start playing the game of rewriting individual sentences in slightly different ways, you're only covering up those problems, not fixing them. However, other DYKers are more tolerant of this, so I suggest you wait for someone else to come along and conduct a new review. I would like to re-iterate, though, for the benefit of the next reviewer, that I only spot-checked a few sentences, and my first comment in this thread should not be taken as an exhaustive survey of the article's close paraphrasing problems. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 14:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol redirect vote 4.svgNo, I have you to thank for explaining to me where the problems are in this article. If so, then the solution is to remove the whole critical part, and leave only the historical part, i.e. the facts. When it was written, where, why, etc. Remove the opinions, even if qualified and unanimous, and leave the facts. Do you agree, @Sojourner in the earth:? That's what I did, I hope that what remains is ok. Alex2006 (talk) 15:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New Reviewer needed. Alex2006 (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 10[edit]

Micro Star v. FormGen Inc.

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Jorahm (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 19:01, 15 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Micro Star v. FormGen Inc.; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I have watched lots of other editors come in and make these DYK templates after I've done the work on GA. It is nice to see but I am not sure if I am supposed to comment or if I can even provide any kind of input. I would change a few words to make the DYK comment more accurate:
    ALT2: ... that the video game case Micro Star v. FormGen Inc. affirmed that copyright owners have the exclusive right to make sequels?
    Technically the precedent for this is much older but Micro Star is a more modern case applying it directly to video games. Jorahm (talk) 19:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 11[edit]

United States v. Strong

(
)

Created by Dr vulpes (talk). Self-nominated at 21:14, 18 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/United States v. Strong; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol delete vote.svg The hook is difficult to resist, but I am not satisfied with the sources and the amount of coverage I see. It appears to me that the case has not received enough in-depth coverage in reliable sources, i.e. something more reputable than salon.com, to warrant a standalone article. Furthermore, the tone of the article strikes me as too casual for an encyclopedia. I suggest that we first resolve the question of encyclopedic notability. Surtsicna (talk) 19:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Surtsicna, Would these sources address your concerns? I've added them to the article, they might be a bit hard to access I had to use the wikipedia library. Russell, Eric (26 Jul 2013) "After two years in courts, bathroom-mess case ends". Portland Press Herald.; Shepherd, Chuck (2013-09-12). "New of the Weird: Fine Points of the Law". Sun-News.; 1st Circuit affirms conviction of man who leaves nasty surprise in court bathroom". Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly. 2013-08-15. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 01:01, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am not sure, Dr vulpes. I can tell that you invested a considerable effort into the article. I would like there to be a proper discussion to get more opinions, if that is alright. Surtsicna (talk) 17:06, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Surtsicna, no worries that's 100% a-ok with me. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 17:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg nomination doesn't seem to need imminent closure – Surtsicna, DYK usually defers to AfD on questions of notability. If you'd like to get an answer on that, I'd suggest AfDing the article and returning here. me and my big mouth :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 18:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Article is out of AfD. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 04:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment. While the article survived AFD, it was only "no consensus". And furthermore, this article hook seems to skirt the line of 4a on "articles that focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals should be avoided" (I presume Mr. Strong is still alive). At least with stuff like "normal" crimes, there's also the victim side, but... meh. It's not really agreeed on how strong "unduly" is, but I'd weakly suggest giving this one a skip on DYK on 4a grounds. SnowFire (talk) 23:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    SnowFire, just so we're all clear the only reason I even worked on this article is that it was an appeal AND has been cited in other cases. If this was just a case with a man pooping his pants it would be super unethical to create the article about it, but two appeals later (Strong appealed to the Supreme Court) and some legal citations later I didn't feel that this was inappropriate and that's the only reason I nominated this for DYK. I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, just I understand that when we deal with living people we need to be careful and considerate. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 08:06, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I respect that this is a good faith effort, of course. I still feel the article ends up reading somewhat lurid. Like I said, it's a weak objection, but I feel it's still an issue (and an "issue" is not quite the same as "problem", just, not every article that is keepable on Wikipedia is necessarily DYK-certified).
    While we're here - the "legal analysis" section seems to be primary sourced currently. Are there any sources that directly connect the Strakoff case with the Strong case? Both the current citations are before 2010. (I'm not saying delete it, because it does seem to potentially be relevant, but it would be nice to have some other source connect these cases.) SnowFire (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2023 Anheuser-Busch boycott

(
)

Created by Knightoftheswords281 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2023 Anheuser-Busch boycott; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Passerby comment (this is not a review, others should still feel free to grab this as a review). Given that there's plenty of sources on this topic and that it's pretty controversial, I'd suggest removing Newsweek as a reference from the article and from any proposed hooks without a truly powerful justification for why any specific Newsweek story is reliable. See WP:NEWSWEEK, that publication has gone downhill since 2013 or so and just makes stuff up these days, and is considered a suspicious-if-not-entirely-deprecated source. While here, I'd check the sources against WP:RSP in general - WP:FORBESCON suggests that using the hook referenced to a Forbes contributor is also not great and should be replaced if possible, unless there's an independent case to be made that the specific author is reliable. SnowFire (talk) 03:28, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol possible vote.svg an active merge discussion and three maintenance tags are all disqualifying – it'll need to come off before a review. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 16:52, 15 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Any updates? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:19, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - all tags on article have been removed @theleekycauldron. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 20:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Valentina Bodrug-Lungu

(
)

Created by Lajmmoore (talk). Self-nominated at 20:05, 12 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Valentina Bodrug-Lungu; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Symbol delete vote.svg Hold up. What is this person's claim to notability as per Wikipedia:Notability (people), let alone Wikipedia:Notability (academics)? Highest academic rank is as an associate professor, the coverage in the press seems to be sparse, and much of the article is based on a summary on her opinions on this and that topic, or mentioning some small organizations she founded and leads. Not one award, not one piece of evidence about her significance in the field(s) she covers, not one single position as editor of a journal or leader of an academic body. Until and unless some of these criteria are shown to apply the bio should not be included on DYK, and should in fact be deleted as promotional cruft. Dahn (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Hello Dahn, thanks for adding your point of view. It was her foundation of Gender Centru and her work as a pioneer of gender studies in Moldova that means inclusion here is appropriate. I've added a three further sources, which have expanded the article somewhat. I would encourage you to think holistically about the field of gender studies - this article was written as part of an Women in Red theme (I'll cross-post this discussion here) - since the discipline itself is under-research and under-represented. I see you're a Romanian speaker - so I wonder if you have access to further sources, particularly scholarly reviews, that could help expand the article? Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 07:15, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Lajmmoore Yes, please let's not go down the loaded-language path of "thanks for adding your point of view" when I am quoting wikipedia policies. Do go over them and cite me the part that would make Bodrug-Lungu notable for this project: as compared to those criteria, and not some others we invent especially for her, how is she notable? (For instance, is she called a "pioneer of gender studies" by a leading newspaper, or is you calling her that, and asking us to comply with your claim?) Yes, I do speak Romanian, and yes, I have to say she is not notable even at that -- there are no hidden inaccessible sources that make her more notable than she currently seems; not that the burden of proving she is notable would fall on me -- it falls on you, as the author. Regards, Dahn (talk) 07:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • In the entry, a UN document references the claim that she pioneered gender studies in Moldova. Innisfree987 (talk) 10:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The "document" (indeed, Biruitorul is correct to call it a press release -- on which see WP:PSTS) says that she created a Masters' course, which is not the same thing as her scholarship being pioneering of anything. Dahn (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Ms. Bodrug-Lungu built the foundation for gender education in Moldova". Innisfree987 (talk) 17:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Says a capsule biography leading into a press release. This is puffery, not scholarship or objectivity. — Biruitorul Talk 18:34, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Not just puffery, but note how that quote was not given in full: "Ms. Bodrug-Lungu built the foundation for gender education in Moldova through the creation of the Masters’ course ‘Therapy for Family Relationships’ at Moldova State University." This is not a comment on her scholarship, but on her administrative functions. Dahn (talk) 03:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You’re entitled to your opinion that teaching is an unimportant contribution to the field but the source takes a different view. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You're entitled to your opinion that it does, but wikipedia guidelines are quite clear that they it isn't important enough to warrant biographical articles. Dahn (talk) 10:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You’ve misread my view, and, I believe, WP:NPROF. Both the policy and I take the view that significant contributions are decided by sources, not personal opinions of what kinds of scholarly contributions count. Innisfree987 (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Significant contributions are decided by sources independent of the subject, and which refer to scholarship. If they do not refer to scholarship, then it is you inferring the claim that they still should be taken into account. If you want to cite criterion 7 of WP:PROF, you will need to show sources (many, independent, and themselves of importance) explicitly sating why she is significant: "she is the leading expert in the field of" -- that sort of statement. Dahn (talk) 20:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Incidentally, "Gender Centru" (a name that somehow manages to be ungrammatical in two languages) is a minuscule NGO, precisely as I mentioned; it has no virtually no coverage in the media, a website that is under construction, and seems mainly a one-person operation by Bodrug-Lungu. This is not an issue of gender bias -- it's an issue of claiming Bodrug-Lungu should have a puff-piece on wikipedia because there supposedly is a gender bias (which she herself makes a profession out of pointing out, incidentally). Dahn (talk) 07:32, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There is frequently a tendency to try to have articles about academics deleted if they are not about full professors. In this case, whatever Dahn maintains about lack of media coverage, the fact that the UN and the Council of Europe have referred to Bodrug-Lungu and/or to Gender Centru in multiple articles makes her notable. We should therefore proceed with the DYK as planned. (I had no difficulty in finding coverage of Bodrug-Lungu in the Moldovan media [3], [4]).--Ipigott (talk) 11:30, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • But the level of coverage she’s received in the Moldovan media is trivial. In the first source, she is quoted as insisting on a gender quota for the government. In the second, she recites some platitudes. Neither source adds to any claim of notability. Which of her publications has made a scholarly impact? What academic prizes has she received? What discoveries has she made? Or are we reducing our notability standards on a whim?
  • Moving on, simply invoking “the UN” does not exclude those sources from close scrutiny. All this does is attest she once appeared on a panel; surely not all panelists are notable, UN or not. This is a press release, of the type that agency puts out by the dozens.
  • There is still no objective evidence of WP:PROF or any other notability criterion being met. I too object to promotion. — Biruitorul Talk 12:05, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Was the AFD the only thing holding this back or are there still other issues? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:15, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Narutolovehinata5 Re-reading the discussion above, it seems like notability was the primary issue, hence the AfD nomination. However I can't speak for others in the discussion above, who may have further concerns to share. Lajmmoore (talk) 11:58, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 14[edit]

University College London

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Robminchin (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/University College London; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Non-reviewing comment: the above seem pretty boring. Why not:
Alt2 "...that the kidnapping of Phineas, the mascot of University College London, sparked a conflict that involved rotten apples, castration, and the embalmed head of Jeremy Bentham?"
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Alt3 "...that the rivalries of students at the University College London have led to pitched battles with other schools involving rotten apples, castration, and the embalmed head of Jeremy Bentham?
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Question?
  • Interesting: Red XN - n
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg The new GA article nomination could use a better hook, and perhaps a picture. --evrik (talk) 02:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Falaki Shirvani

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by HistoryofIran (talk) and Amitchell125 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 19:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Falaki Shirvani; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Associated Students of the University of California, Los Angeles

(
)
1967 photo of then student Kareem Abdul-Jabbar taken by the students of UCLA
1967 photo of then student Kareem Abdul-Jabbar taken by the students of UCLA

Created by ROADKILL (talk) and Dr vulpes (talk). Nominated by Evrik (talk) at 17:39, 14 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Associated Students of the University of California, Los Angeles; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - question
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg @Evrik: Looks pretty much good, though in the source I am only seeing it talk about athletics and parking, not housing. Could you point out where it says that? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 15[edit]

Kathryn Bryce

(
)

5x expanded by Bahnfrend (talk). Self-nominated at 14:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kathryn Bryce; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: Green tickY
  • Neutral: Green tickY
  • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Red XN - Earwig turned up five results with >10% similarity (84.3, 51.9, 31.0, 13.0, and 12.3), and while most of them are quotes (which may require an explanation of relevance or trimming per WP:COPYQUOTE; there are nine quote boxes, and one of the two-paragraph boxes are particularly long), I found a few close paraphrases (for example, compare When Bryce first moved south to England to attend university at Loughborough in 2017, Warwickshire's Division One county team captain Marie Kelly was also studying there in the article with Bryce first moved south to England in 2017 to attend university at Loughborough where Warwickshire captain Marie Kelly was also studying in the attached source) which should be resummarized, if possible (see WP:LIMITED).

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - I'm not really a cricket fan, so I recommend linking partnership. Also, "Under 17s" is redundantly said twice, so I recommend mentioning just the Under-17 level, namely:
ALT1: ... that at Under-17 level, cricketing sisters Kathryn and Sarah Bryce combined in an unbroken partnership of 336 for Scotland against Lincolnshire?

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Red XN - None yet
Overall: Symbol question.svg Expanded starting 11 April, four days before nom. Expanded almost eightfold from 375 to 2975 words between 8 and 15 April, and currently at 3293 (not counting the {{quote}} boxes given the limitations of WP:PROSESIZE) as of now. I noticed that you wanted to add another article to this nom, which would require you to add a second QPQ. Please ping me if you've added article 2, if you've addressed the issues with article 1, and if you've done both QPQs. ミラP@Miraclepine 15:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bahnfrend: Given your subsequent edits, just need these changes and you're good to go for the "plagiarismfree" part:
  1. Change "over the last couple of years" to "in the past few years"
  2. Change "develop her cricket full-time in a high-performance programme, albeit as an unpaid student, and only during the academic year" to "improve her cricketing skills full-time in a high-performance programme, where she would participate as an unpaid student during the academic year".
I'll still wait for you to finish the promised Sarah Bryce expansion and to do the two QPQs if possible. ミラP@Miraclepine 16:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Miraclepine: Thanks for your helpful comments; I had overlooked checking the article with Earwig before nominating it. In Wikipedia bios, I like to include quotes, so that the subject speaks to the reader in her (or his) own voice, and to give the reader the benefit of verbatim comments by others. However, I accept that the original quotes I added to this article needed some trimming, which I have done. I will complete the upgrade of the other article, and the two QPQs, some time in the next week or so. Bahnfrend (talk) 09:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bahnfrend: QPQ1 is done, but given your plans for the Sarah Bryce expansion, I'll wait until that and QPQ2 are done. Ping me if you do so. ミラP@Miraclepine 00:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Miraclepine: I'm now working on Sarah Bryce, but the work is proceeding more slowly than I'd expected, partly because the statistics on women's cricket at ESPNcricinfo were down for some time. I understand that they are back up again now. I will nominate for DYK within a week of my completing of the upgrade. Bahnfrend (talk) 14:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bahnfrend: It's been three weeks, and the Sarah article hasn't been nominated. And considering the article's expansion within the maximum week (8182 -> 9022) doesn't meet the 5x criteria and it's not a GA or a recent creation, you won't need to do a second QPQ. In the meantime I'll approve ALT0 and wait for a second reviewer to approve ALT1. ミラP@Miraclepine 16:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Miraclepine: The main problem was that most of the statistics were offline for several weeks, including after my last post. They're now back online again, but I've been in hospital in the last week or so and therefore progress has been impaired for another reason. Additionally, the pre-upgrade version of the Sarah Bryce bio was already of substantial length, and I'm not sure I would ever have been able to lengthen it 5 x. Anyway, if you allow me a few more days, I'll complete the upgrade, and then we can go ahead and DYK her sister's bio while also emboldening the link to this one. Bahnfrend (talk) 05:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bahnfrend: Based on the prose size from one week ago, (9022 B) you'd have to expand Sarah Bryce to 45110 B to make it eligible through the 5x expand process. Per WP:DYKCRIT 1, I'd say a GA nom is the most realistic route. ミラP@Miraclepine 23:10, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Still, you have an option to send the Kathryn article to DYK without Sarah. ミラP@Miraclepine 23:12, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Miraclepine: I agree. The Sarah article was just too long to begin with. I have now finished expanding it, so you can send the Kathryn article to DYK. I only ask that the link to the Sarah article in the hook be emboldened as well (ie "... that at Under-17 level, cricketing sisters Kathryn and Sarah Bryce combined in an unbroken partnership of 336 for Scotland against Lincolnshire?"), given that both articles have recently been expanded, and that it's inappropriate to treat the sisters differently, even though only one of the articles is eligible for DYK. Bahnfrend (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bahnfrend: I understand you want both sisters bolded, but based on this table (can't put it here due to a glitch with {{DYKsubpage}}, the Sarah Bryce article unfortunately doesn't meet the 5x expansion criteria and is way older than a week, so if you would like the article bolded, the only option WP:DYKCRIT#1 permit is to improve and nominate it for GA status. But if you want to run the nomination with just Kathryn bolded, I have no objections. Would you like to nom the article for GA, or are you fine with the hook being run without the article bolded? ミラP@Miraclepine 18:52, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh My God (Adele song)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by MaranoFan (talk). Self-nominated at 13:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Oh My God (Adele song); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

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

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg @MaranoFan: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 19:13, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MaranoFan and Onegreatjoke: The LA Times article states, "Oh My God has bleary backing vocals processed nearly beyond recognition". So the hook needs some tweaking. Our hook says Adelle's vocals. Bruxton (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bruxton, Adele actually sings all of the vocals on this song but I understand your concerns so I have now tweaked it to something more explicitly stated in the source.--NØ 03:05, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MaranoFan: I think we may have to qualify the statement by stating this was the opinion of the LA Times reviewer. And perhaps quotes.
  • ALT1: ... that a review in the Los Angeles Times claimed that some of the backing vocals on Adele's song "Oh My God" are "processed nearly beyond recognition"?
Bruxton (talk) 03:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This seems unnecessary to me. The vocal processing (and the unrecognizability for that matter) is an objective fact and can easily be verified if you play the song. We can save the attribution for the article and keep it out of the hook, in my opinion. Regards.--NØ 04:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A review is akin to an editorial so it is an opinion piece. We probably have to qualify it or we are stating the opinion as fact. It may seem objective, but opinions are subjective: do we have other reviews which also call the backing vocals "processed nearly beyond recognition"? Bruxton (talk) 14:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Disagreed. The vocals are objectively processed and unrecognisable and you just have to play the first few seconds of the song to hear them. "The song is good/bad" would be an opinion, this is not. Your proposed hook is not interesting or DYK-worthy so I'll stick with the one already approved by another reviewer. That’s all I have to say about that, and the promoter can make the final decision about which hook they prefer.—NØ 15:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair enough, thanks for the message. I will leave this nomination for another promotor. Bruxton (talk) 04:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol question.svg For what it's worth, I have to agree with Bruxton here. Even if one could verify something about a song by themselves, that could still be considered a subjective view and to me at least sounds too close to original research for my tastes. I have to agree that ALT1 or at least some variant thereof is a suitable compromise: while ALT0 is technically accurate, Bruxton has a point, and we have modified or pulled hooks in the past when hooks based on opinion pieces were clearly not indicated as such. We just want to avoid a trip to WP:ERRORS or another WT:DYK discussion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:35, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about these, NLH5?--NØ 09:56, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will leave it to Onegreatjoke or Bruxton to decide, but personally I supposed both are okay alternatives, although I do have some slight reservations as they may be... uh... uncomfortable. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your efforts here @Narutolovehinata5: - I will remove the stop and allow others to make a decision about hooks and promotion. Bruxton (talk) 16:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Exometeorology

(
)
Artist's impression of HD 189733 b, an exoplanet with a wide range of observed exometeorological conditions.
Artist's impression of HD 189733 b, an exoplanet with a wide range of observed exometeorological conditions.
  • ... that meteorological phenomena, such as eastward winds blowing at speeds of 2 km/s (1.2 mi/s) around HD 189733 b (pictured), have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? Source: Louden, Tom; Wheatley, Peter J. (25 November 2015). "SPATIALLY RESOLVED EASTWARD WINDS AND ROTATION OF HD 189733b". The Astrophysical Journal. 814 (2): L24. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L24.
    • ALT1: ... that meteorological phenomena have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? Source: Louden, Tom; Wheatley, Peter J. (25 November 2015). "SPATIALLY RESOLVED EASTWARD WINDS AND ROTATION OF HD 189733b". The Astrophysical Journal. 814 (2): L24. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L24.
    • ALT2: ... that meteorological phenomena, such as wind speeds of 2 km/s (1.2 mi/s) around HD 189733 b (pictured), have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? Source: Louden, Tom; Wheatley, Peter J. (25 November 2015). "SPATIALLY RESOLVED EASTWARD WINDS AND ROTATION OF HD 189733b". The Astrophysical Journal. 814 (2): L24. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/814/2/L24.
    • Reviewed: [[]]
    • Comment: Thank you for reviewing this nomination!

5x expanded by Varmint256 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:11, 15 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Exometeorology; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Extremely intersting hook. Article and hook all meet criteria. Would say it could also run in a more concise ALT1: ... that meteorological phenomena have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? I only say this because this version might be even more interesting to general readers, but ALT0 is good to go, as is, already. QPQ just needs to be done and then it'll be greenlit. Could even run with this image perhaps? Soulbust (talk) 01:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Soulbust, thank you for the review; it's great to hear that you enjoyed the hook! Thanks for suggesting an alt hook and image as well. I'll add your suggested hook to the nomination, but I'd still like to include some facts in the hook instead of trimming them all out. How about ALT2: ... that meteorological phenomena, such as wind speeds of 2 km/s (1.2 mi/s) around HD 189733 b (pictured), have recently been observed in exoplanet atmospheres? I guess that one is a tad more concise while still including the interesting fact. As for the picture, I'll add that to the nomination as well, but I need to add it to the article first. For QPQ, this is actually my first nomination for DYK (and one of my first article edits in general); I would still be happy to review another nomination to help out! Again, thanks for the review, and please let me know if I need to fulfill any other requirements! Varmint256 (talk) 03:50, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Varmint256: Sounds good! Didn't realize it was your first nom, so definitely good to go for the DYK section since QPQ can be waived here. The ALT0 or ALT2 both work. I would prefer ALT2 since it goes with the image, but all of these hooks work and I'll leave that up to the hook's promoter. Good job on this and the article! Soulbust (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just edited the nomination according to your suggestions. Thanks again for the suggestions and approval, excited to see if it'll show up in DYK soon! Varmint256 (talk) 05:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg @Varmint256 and Soulbust: I have added the [citation needed] tags to the article. Bruxton (talk) 19:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bruxton: Thank you for reviewing the article and nomination as well! I was going to address your concern, but I haven't yet seen any edits adding any citation needed tags to statements in the article. What statements/segments seem problematic? Varmint256 (talk) 19:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nevermind, just saw your edit. I'll get to those citations soon. Varmint256 (talk) 19:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just wanted to update; the past week has been busy for me, but I'm still working to get out those citations. Sorry for the delay. Varmint256 (talk) 21:14, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Varmint256: any progress? BorgQueen (talk) 18:56, 14 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BorgQueen:@Bruxton: Finally was able to cite most of the statements and remove others, but there was one statement that I'm not exactly sure how to cite - the last sentence in the 3rd paragraph. By the definition of exometeorology, an exoplanet needs an atmosphere in the first place to have time-varying conditions in that atmosphere. However, I have not been able to find any studies that state that or contradict that in a peer-reviewed context. Thus, I wanted to ask you Bruxton - why did you add the citation needed tag to that sentence? Was there anything specific you hoped I could find to support that statement? Also, to everyone who reviewed my nomination, thanks for being patient. Is it still eligible for DYK if I can get all the citation needed tags taken care of? Varmint256 (talk) 05:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I liked this nomination and it is a great image, but we cannot have un-cited claims WP:DYKSG#D2 and the nominator has had 1.5 months to correct the issues. If the sentences air circulation and weather patterns can only exist and redistribute a planet's heat if that planet has an atmosphere. Thus, an exoplanet's exometeorology depends on whether it has an atmosphere at all. cannot be cited it is an unresolved issue and the nomination remains stuck. Bruxton (talk) 14:22, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 16[edit]

David Baron (Messianic leader)

(
)
A photograph of the Jewish-Christian convert David Baron
A photograph of the Jewish-Christian convert David Baron
  • ... that the Hebrew-Christian evangelist David Baron travelled to at least nine countries during his missonary journeys? Source: Fromow, George (1943). David Baron and the Hebrew Christian Testimony to Israel. London: Hebrew Christian Testimony to Israel.
    • Reviewed:
    • Comment: David Baron is a fascinating figure. Though often labelled a Messianic Jew he rejected that label and sought to retain Jewish distinctiveness from non-Jewish Christianity. Better described as Jewish or Hebrew Christian, he was very well-travelled and a prolific evangelist.

It is a true shame that few people know about him. 5x expanded by ThePatristicsFan (talk). Self-nominated at 17:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/David Baron (Messianic leader); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 18[edit]

Leonard Abrams

(
)
  • ... that Leonard Abrams was the founder of the East Village Eye, an arts and culture magazine which in 1982 is believed to have been the first publication to print a comprehensive definition of hip-hop? Source: "Despite its downtown focus, the Eye also cast a glance uptown and beyond to chronicle the world of hip-hop as it hurtled toward the mainstream. It ran early feature articles about Afrika Bambaataa, Run-DMC and the graffiti artist Fab 5 Freddy.
    Indeed, Mr. Abrams and others associated with the Eye long claimed that it was the first publication to print a comprehensive definition of hip-hop, with a parenthetical in a January 1982 interview with Mr. Bambaataa by the writer Michael Holman that summarized the term as “the all-inclusive tag for the rapping, breaking, graffiti-writing, crew-fashion-wearing street subculture.”"

Created by Thriley (talk) and Wil540 art (talk). Nominated by Thriley (talk) at 23:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Leonard Abrams; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I will take this review:

General eligibility:

Policy compliance:

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

Overall: Symbol question.svg Created 9 days before, which is pushing the discretionary envelope a bit (8-10 days are sometimes still possible). There are also some key phrases from the NYT article, leading to an Earwig hit of 30.6%, albeit one of those is from a quote and is appropriate, and two others can be addressed (and the actual similarities are a fraction of the NYT article total). The hook needs some reworking, as right now it could be misread around the 1982. So with a little work, this can be ready, subject to a second opinion and / or an explanation on the delayed submission. SeoR (talk) 14:34, 19 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on April 19[edit]

Battle of New Carthage

(
)
  • ... that after a failed Roman assault at the Battle of New Carthage, the romans launched a second assault in the afternoon, surprising the Carthaginian army? Source: Goldsworthy, Adrian (2004) [2003]. In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire. London: Phoenix. ISBN 978-0-7538-1789-6. Page 62-63 , Goldsworthy, Adrian (2006) [2000]. The Fall of Carthage: The Punic Wars 265–146 BC. London: Phoenix. ISBN 978-0-304-36642-2. Page 274 , Lowe, Benedict J (2000). "Polybius 10.10.12 and the Existence of Salt-Flats at Carthago Nova". Phoenix. Classical Association of Canada. 54 (1/2 (Spring - Summer)): 39–52. doi:10.2307/1089089. JSTOR 1089089. page 42
    • ALT1: ... that the martial booty seized by the Romans after the Battle of New Carthage, containing 63 merchant ships, numerous catapults, large amounts of weapons, and more, has been described as "colossal"? Source: Hoyos, Dexter (2003). Hannibal's Dynasty: Power and Politics in the Western Mediterranean, 247–183 BC. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-203-41782-9. Page 144 , Bagnall, Nigel (1999). The Punic Wars: Rome, Carthage and the Struggle for the Mediterranean. London: Pimlico. ISBN 978-0-7126-6608-4. Page 209
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/German submarine U-1206

Improved to Good Article status by Gog the Mild (talk) and Ifly6 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 18:51, 24 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Battle of New Carthage; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • I would prefer the second element rather than the former. J H Richardson CQ 68 (2018) 458ff raises pretty reasonable doubts – largely about physical impossibility – as to why we shouldn't entirely believe the ancient stories of the city's capture. Ifly6 (talk) 19:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Just in case there is trouble regarding this down the road, can I note that I was unaware of this article's nomination for DYK until just now, three days after the event. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 20[edit]

2023 Canadian federal worker strike

(
)
PSAC strikers outside of Tunney's Pasture in Ottawa, Ontario
PSAC strikers outside of Tunney's Pasture in Ottawa, Ontario

Created by Knightoftheswords281 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:14, 25 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/2023 Canadian federal worker strike; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Eucalyptus wandoo

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Hughesdarren (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 19:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Eucalyptus wandoo; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

So added in ALT2. gobonobo + c 14:29, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol question.svg Detailed article about the tree and its use, on fine sources, no copyvio obvious. I sugest you use an image, perhaps of the woodlands. Without it, I'm afraid ALT1 would need to say that it is a tree, and ALT2 is more or less an explanation of the name. For people too lazy to look up Noongar, it also hangs in the air location-wise, or should we get it from Eucalyptus? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:09, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What do you think, Onegreatjoke? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: I guess I could use File:Eucalyptus wandoo gnangarra.JPG or just say "... that the Noongar used the Eucalyptus wandoo tree as a medicine and ointment?" Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:19, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

David Webber (basketball)

(
)

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 11:46, 22 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/David Webber (basketball); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on April 21[edit]

Jordan Stephens

(
)
Stephens at V Festival in 2012
Stephens at V Festival in 2012

Created by Launchballer (talk). Self-nominated at 12:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Jordan Stephens; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Comment The hook fails to have worldwide appeal, since most of us have no clue as to who Boulting was. Dahn (talk) 18:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I knew there was one more QPQ I had to do, and I'll do that tomorrow. As for the hook:
ALT1: ... that Rizzle Kicks musician Jordan Stephens is the grandson of Brighton Rock director John Boulting?--Launchballer 23:45, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Template:Did you know nominations/Arrest of Ulysses S. Grant--Launchballer 13:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not really sure if that hook is any better. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 08:19, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT2 ... that Jordan Stephens confirmed his relationship with Jade Thirlwall after the pair were spotted at a Black Trans Lives Matter rally in London?--Launchballer 07:19, 24 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol possible vote.svg The image is licensed 2.0 from Flickr, but we need to crop the image to remove "@Sean Reynolds Photography" per WP:WATERMARK. Note: I have tagged the images {{imagewatermark}} It would be promotional for us to advertise the photographer on the main page. We should also say something about the person or talents rather than ALT0 and ALT1 which connect the person to someone else. The relationship is somewhat interesting so I will leave it up to a prep builder - it checks out and is cited. The article is new and long enough and neutral. The QPQ is done and the article has the correct inline citations. I will propose another ALT and cross off the two rejected hooks.
  • ALT3: … that Jordan Stephens has released solo music under his own name and the pseudonyms "J Steezy", "Rizzle", "Wildhood", "Gnarly Ventura", and "Al, the Native"? source: soccerbible] not sure it is a great source but the hook appears in the lead and body of the article. Bruxton (talk) 15:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]



Articles created/expanded on April 22[edit]

Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars (Game Boy Advance)

(
)

Created by Cukie Gherkin (talk). Self-nominated at 18:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars (Game Boy Advance); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • The target article needs to be linked and in bold font. Schwede66 19:20, 3 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment. This is not a full review, but there are some issues with the hook. First off, if you're using a YouTube video of non-trivial length, it is respectful of others' time to point out the specific spot to check. Are you citing the comments from 7:55 - 8:30 or so? Because if so, I'd argue the hook is somewhat misrepresenting what Warriner said there. He said it was one of his proudest achievements, yes, but he clarifies that it was because it was essentially a duo project. Shorn of context in the hook, however, one would presume that his pride is due to it being one of his best creations, rather than "much done with few people." This changes the tone. And more generally... I'm not sold the hook suggestion is all that interesting anyway. "Did you know a programmer who worked hard says their own work is great" isn't really very unique or interesting, it's basically expected that they'll like their own works. (Not to mention that "one of" really defangs the impact - Warriner seems like a cool guy, but he's not THAT famous, and this is an off-the-cuff remark. Lots of works can be "one of" the best.) Any other hook ideas? SnowFire (talk) 00:14, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    All great points. I'll ponder on a more interesting hook. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:21, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @SnowFire: Is this better? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:53, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is better, but maybe more alts would still be good. I don't think you need the "The" capitalized and part of the link. I'd also question the relevance of "mad suggestion" referenced to a press release - it's a little promotional and also still uninteresting (what was so mad about it? To a general audience, that is. I presume the answer is really "the GBA was considered underpowered" for this, but I doubt many main page viewers would catch on.). And is "designers" really the best word? I'd suggest something more like this, at least if keeping the same basic fact:
  • ALT1 ... that development of the Game Boy Advance version of Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars was largely made by just two people?Source: https://www.eurogamer.net/article-30537 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh_uECxlC9M (starting at 7:55)
    This might be still considered too uninteresting, though. I'll defer this to the DYK reviewer, just throwing an idea out there. SnowFire (talk) 17:26, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hmm, I dunno... maybe I should just withdraw the nomination. It's a game that's practically most well-known for its quaintness, which itself doesn't lend itself to having an interesting DYK aspect. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:48, 20 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Speaking as a non-reviewer, I did find it interesting that a largely two-person team ported a game to the GBA (small indie team-sized teams weren't so common back then), but maybe it's just because I have an interest in video games, so I'm probably not the most impartial person to give an opinion. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's a valid point, though yeah, non-gamers may not appreciate why that's an interesting point. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 03:13, 25 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 23[edit]

David Fletcher (baseball)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Sewageboy (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 23:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/David Fletcher (baseball); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Will review. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol possible vote.svg Newness criteria met, promoted to GA within 7 days of nomination. Article is long enough. Suggestion to change "MLB" to "Major League Baseball". Both as "MLB" and "Major League Baseball", this is under the 200 character hook limit. "Fletcher and his wife, Kierra, married in January 2019 and reside in Orange County, California." The wife's name should be removed per WP:BLPNAME. Fletcher is acclaimed by fans and baseball media alike for his defensive abilities in the middle infield. this requires more than one citation to prove "baseball media alike" and the word "fans" isn't in the cited article at all. Thus, NPOV violation. Article has sufficient inline citations. No image in hook so OK there. QPQ done. Hook is interesting to a broad audience once MLB is changed to "Major League Baseball". Similar to Angels Hall of Famer Vladimir Guerrero, that's nowhere in the citation. Hook is neutral and doesn't focus unduly on negative aspects of living people. First source to ESPN is a dead link and needs to be re-cited. Thus, the hook isn't cited in the article at current. Free from close paraphrasing, as copying entity copied us. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:01, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Andrius Domaševičius

(
)

Created by KrivisKrivaitis (talk). Self-nominated at 16:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Andrius Domaševičius; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

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

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Red XN - inline citation needed
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - hook update needed
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg @KrivisKrivaitis: Article looks good. Though, the article states that he was one of the founders of the party and not The founder, so the hook should be updated for that. Also, the hooks need to be cited with inline citations. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:31, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Onegreatjoke: Hi, I recently suggested user @KrivisKrivaitis: to participate in the DYK procedure as I noticed that he regularly create new content of high quality, but he is still inexperienced in this. I added the reference template to the article where it is necessary to support this hook (my edit) and here is a quote from the Lithuanian reference which support this hook: "1910 m. įkūrė privačią kliniką ir ginekologinę ligoninę, kurioje neturtingos moterys buvo gydomos nemokamai." (English: In 1910, he established a private clinic and gynecologists' hospital where poor women were treated free of charge; link to the reference). I cannot modify the hook myself, but it can be easily changed by KrivisKrivaitis or an administrator who will add it to the main page (that Domaševičius was one of the founders of the party). I think everything else is perfect here. -- Pofka (talk) 10:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja

(
)

Created by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 17:10, 23 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg New enough and long enough. @FuzzyMagma: QPQ pending. Hooks seem fine though I had to copyedit. Earwig comes back fairly high but mostly for the names of organizations, some of which are quite long (Department of African, African American and Diaspora Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill). These issues need to be resolved.
    • "This activism led to his expulsion from high school." ends a paragraph and is not backed by a citation.
    • Consider adding "allegedly" to ALT0. It might be more accurate.
  • Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
sentenced that was contested is now removed. Fixed most long names that tripped Earwig. Allegedly added to hook (see below)
ALT2: ... that Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja alleged that Rwanda stole chimpanzees from the Democratic Republic of the Congo? FuzzyMagma (talk) 20:27, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Sammi Brie: QPQ done FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:11, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 24[edit]

Portillo Cáceres v Paraguay

(
)

Created by Gobonobo (talk). Self-nominated at 22:08, 28 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Portillo Cáceres v Paraguay; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • This review is for ALT1 which is more compelling IMO.
General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

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

Overall: Symbol question.svg Interesting article, good quality and writing! The Earwig results are too high for 3 sources. I understand that most of them are quotes, but there are a bit too many quotes as per MOS:QUOTE and some would be better if rewritten. Some close paraphrases as well. Otherwise all good. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:47, 26 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 25[edit]

715 Harrison

(
)

Moved to mainspace by InvadingInvader (talk). Self-nominated at 18:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/715 Harrison; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 26[edit]

Christopher Lowrey

(
)

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 14:33, 2 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Christopher Lowrey; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg While the article meets DYK requirements and a QPQ has been provided, the hook as currently written is rather bland and requires specialist knowledge to really get it. If I were you, I'd probably focus more on the Metropolitan Opera angle as that's one that's more well-known and probably more familiar among non-specialists, as basically saying "performer did his job at a particular festival" isn't really something that would interest someone who already isn't interested in the topic. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:05, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am sorry but don't understand. The Met is the destination of the hook, no? We can add a year to the Met performance, and can add that it was a live broadcast. Any world premiere is noteworthy, I think, even if you don't know Glyndebourne, but for others it's one of the most notable opera festivals, which was mentioned in hooks before (Liselotte Hammes for example, Marina de Gabaráin for another, - the greatest singers appear there, many having made their career from there). Gabaráin's lead (article not by me) says: "Marina de Gabaráin ... was a Spanish mezzo-soprano. Her international career began at Glyndebourne in 1952, where she appeared in Rossini's La Cenerentola as Angelina (Cinderella), which became her signature role."
    Right now we have a hook on the Main page about a singer saying more or less only that she sang well but was fat. Can we for a change inform, about a career beginning in Glyndebourne and leading via Australia to the Met? - If that's too long, we can skip Australia, but I think that it's particularly interesting as the composer is from there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:24, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's probably an overestimation here about how much broad audiences would understand about such things or find it interesting. It's one of the DYK criterion that a hook needs to be interesting even to those with no specialist knowledge, and as currently written, the hook doesn't meet that. That's not to say that the article can't meet that criterion and like I said I think a hook focused specifically on the Met might solve my concerns. But remember this: we write the hooks for broad audiences, even those who don't care about opera and classical music. We don't write hooks for the nominator. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We will probably disagree. Every world premiere is a distinct interesting fact, and 2017 is still rather recent news. ... that countertenor Christopher Lowrey took part in the world premiere of Brett Dean's Hamlet? - that would be an acceptable hook. Everything else is extra, and provides context. I find it astonishing, and worth telling the audience also ...
  • ... that this piece by an Australian composer (with a recognizable title) was premiered in England at all
  • ... that it was premiered at the Glyndebourne Festival which to know doesn't hurt
  • ... that this young man made the typical start for a world career, being noticed in Glyndebourne
  • ... that a production travels from Glyndebourne to Australia and the Met (I didn't know that!)
To focus on the Met would be undue weight because there he only performed minor roles. Why not supply e bit of extra information? - Btw, the "fat singer" hook was modified, and I felt understood - which feels good! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:27, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Such a hook is too reliant on specialist information, and we try as much as possible to avoid that. It may appeal to you but it does not appeal to non-opera fans, and Wikipedia isn't the Operapedia. You even admit in the above that he "made the typical start for a world career", which means his circumstances aren't even unusual. What makes him any different from the many other international opera artists that got their big break at Glyndebourne and performed internationally elsewhere? I'm sure Lowrey is a talented man and deserves to reach where he got to be, but this hook appeals to a very small niche, which goes against the DYK criteria. What I mean to say is: it proves his talent, but it doesn't make him atypical from any other person who were noticed at Glyndebourne and performed in a country different from their own. It's no different from a hook about how Carrie Underwood was discovered when she won American Idol and has since performed outside the United States. It shows Underwood is talented, but it doesn't make Underwood different from the many other American singers who have performed outside America. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:34, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ALT1: ... that countertenor Christopher Lowrey took part in the world premiere of Brett Dean's Hamlet?
What in my claim that this is an acceptable hook did you not understand? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think the hook would make much sense to people who don't know Lowrey or Dean. Sure, Hamlet is a recognizable name, but the hook doesn't make it clear how Lowrey being in this particular world premiere is any different from any other actor who was also in said premiere, or how this version of Hamlet is any more special than the many other versions of Hamlet to make Lowrey's participation intriguing by itself. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:11, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't mean the hook to run without context, but it says a lot about the singer:
  • He is a countertenor.
  • He is ready to take part in a new piece.
  • He was ready to leave home.
I will never understand why people would have to know Dean when there is a link. Those interested in new composers can click, and the others can skip the hook anyway. Trying to meet what everybody knows already is for me the exact opposite of "Did you now ...? - expecting a no for an answer, and supplying as much unknown stuff as possible. There's a world of opera to explore beyond the ten composers and 50 operas that "everybody" should know, and for some, even countertenor might be new. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:34, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To serve the wish to say something about him that is unique:
ALT2: ... that when countertenor Christopher Lowrey appeared at the Oper Frankfurt for the first time, as Medoro in Handel's Orlando in 2023, he was the only guest singer?
If you really like that better I can find a ref. However, a countertenor in contemporary music is much more unusual, did you know? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:48, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose that's a better option. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added the ref. The line in question translates to "Medoro is countertenor Christopher Lowrey, house debutant and the only guest in the vocal quintet". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ema Zajmović

(
)
Ema Zajmović
Ema Zajmović
  • ... that poker player Ema Zajmović (pictured) received a wrestling-style belt when she won a World Poker Tour event in Montreal? Source: WPT: "Ever since Zajmovic saw two of her friends win WPT events at Playground Poker Club in Montreal and earn the belt, akin to the kind awarded in boxing and wrestling, it has been on Zajmovic’s mind ... She wanted the championship belt ... She got it." Photo of the belt
    • ALT1: ... that Bosnian-born poker player Ema Zajmović (pictured) is the first woman to win an open-entry Main Event on the World Poker Tour? Source: WPT: "Specifically in regards to a female player winning an open-entry event on the WPT Main Tour ... Zajmovic won the partypoker.net WPT Playground event, becoming the first female WPT champion of an open buy-in event."
    • ALT2: ... that Bosnian-born poker player Ema Zajmović (pictured) is the only woman to win an open-entry Main Event on the World Poker Tour? Source: From tournament page in Jan 2022: "Ema Zajmovic is the only woman to ever win an open WPT Main Tour event." Source isn't super recent, but the full list on wiki doesn't appear to belie the fact ... anyway it'd be fine to go with either of the other hooks.
    • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Dave Kufeld

Created by Hameltion (talk). Self-nominated at 22:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ema Zajmović; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Master of Magic (2022 video game)

(
)

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 11:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Master of Magic (2022 video game); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new and long enough. Article is neutral, reliably sourced, and only pings on Earwigs for a properly attributed quote. QPQ has been completed. I'm not crazy about the hook; calling the original a "classic" feels a bit puffy, as does "a faithful remake" (according to whom?). I would recommend coming up with alternative hooks, or revising the existing one. Morgan695 (talk) 04:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Morgan695, I am open to other ideas, would you have any suggestions for alt hooks? But the sources I am familiar with (cited in the article) are pretty consistent on both counts - they consider 1994's game "classic" and the recent remake quite faithful. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:24, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Piotrus My understanding is that because DYK is being stated in "Wikipedia's voice", any subjective statement needs to be attributed to the person or group of people who made that statement. I think ALT0 can be used if it is revised to reflect that; I'm at a bit of a loss for alternate hooks, since this generally seems to be a pretty unremarkable remake. Morgan695 (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I'm thinking of something related to the playable races, like "besides humans, playable races include orcs, draconians and ant-people?" Or something like "players can create a non-magical wizard and win through military force?" ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:02, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • Zxcvbnm, We could but those are pretty run-of-the-mill. Since this is a remake, I think at least one of the reviews mentioned how the magic system of both games was inspired by Magic the Gathering, which could be a fun and more unusual factoid to mention. Do you have any thoughts on the hook I proposed? I stand by my view that essentially all reviews I found agree on both counts here (classic and faithful). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:38, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • Maybe mentioning the sheer amount of playable species? It may not be 100% original but it's still a somewhat unique aspect for a modern game. I think the original hook is simply stating an obvious fact, so it's not something that will intrigue people at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:52, 28 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ... ALT1: that the 2022 video game Master of Magic is a 4X strategy where players can customize their wizard, chose one of the fourteen playable races, and conquer two planes? [see multiple refs for the second paragraphs in the Gameplay section]
  • ... ALT2: that the 2022 video game Master of Magic is a 4X strategy with a magic system inspired by the card game Magic The Gathering? ref

Articles created/expanded on April 27[edit]

Tarsus çatalburun

(
)

Created by Annwfwn (talk). Self-nominated at 12:59, 27 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Tarsus çatalburun; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • Symbol question.svg @Annwfwn: Article created on 27 April and of sufficient length. Referencing in both the article and the hook is good. Copyvio not detected, this is nominator's 2nd DYK, so no QPQ needed yet. However, I'm not confident that the image is properly licensed - the burvet website it comes from does not show anywhere that they have that license. Can pass if image is removed from article and DYK goes without image. Juxlos (talk) 16:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 28[edit]

History of the British 1st Division 1809–1909

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by EnigmaMcmxc (talk) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 02:02, 5 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/History of the British 1st Division 1809–1909; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • This would automatically meet the DYK criteria if it weren't for the fact that it has been more than a month since this was promoted to GA. That being said, this is only because no one has managed to pick up the nomination until now. I'd like a second opinion on this. Bneu2013 (talk) 16:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on April 29[edit]

Antonio Dini

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Zawed (talk) and Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 17:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Antonio Dini; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - Perhaps a tighter hook?
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Maybe an alt something like:

  • ... that Antonio Dini was the only survivor of a three man crew after he crashed a plane into the sea, but had no recollection of the crash due to concussion? Seddon talk 01:15, 21 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bazzini

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Amitchell125 (talk) and Rhododendrites (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 02:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Bazzini; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

John Goldmark

(
)

Created by Sammielh (talk). Self-nominated at 13:07, 29 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/John Goldmark; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough

Policy compliance:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation

QPQ: Question?
Overall: Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'd say everything was fine and that this was approved for any of the three hooks, with a personal preference for ALT1 because of its simplicity, and because it's less terrifying than ALT2, but I'm a bit concerned with the earwig result that suggests this biography leans heavily on https://www.historylink.org/File/9858 - everything is sourced and there's nothing egregious, but I don't feel familiar enough with the nuances of our current policies to wave this through on my own authority. I'm going to hand this review off to someone else with more experience and pick up another item for my QPQ. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia and sorry I couldn't be more efficient about this! jengod (talk) 02:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jengod: Thanks for taking a look at this and no worries about not feeling comfortable signing off on it. I've added additional sources and tried to reduce the reliance on the HistoryLink source and I am happy to try to continue to do so if requested by a new reviewer. The earwig score is high due to common phrases and quotes but I've tried to reword things where I can. Sammielh (talk) 16:24, 6 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Narutolovehinata5: Apologies, I thought it was any nominations after your fifth nomination that required a QPQ. I have just done one. Sammielh (talk) 11:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Articles created/expanded on April 30[edit]

Lord Adolphus FitzClarence

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Amitchell125 (talk) and Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 19:51, 6 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Lord Adolphus FitzClarence; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

R v ACR Roofing Pty Ltd

(
)

Created by MaxnaCarta (talk). Self-nominated at 01:45, 30 April 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/R v ACR Roofing Pty Ltd; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

  • First, dull hook ... this is hardly the only prosecution or lawsuit in any common-law country, much less Australia, to involve this sort of workplace fatality. Second, sloppily written: "the death of a construction worker falling to his death". Daniel Case (talk) 04:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Harsh...but fair enough Daniel Case. Thanks for pointing out I used the word death twice. Happy to use "involved a construction worker falling to his death". You say this would be dull, do you have an idea for an alternative? I'd be happy to have one put to me. I thought it would be interesting.
Daniel Case - please would you consider a second look at this? Thanks MaxnaCarta (talk) 04:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ALT hook - ... that the High Court of Australia refused to hear an appeal of the decision made in R v ACR Roofing Pty Ltd? (Source: Harpur 2011 in article).
Thanks for pinging me. Again, this one is a dull hook ... it's not unusual for courts of last resort in common-law countries to turn cases down.

Looking over the article, what I think would work is the holding here that a contractor can be held liable for injuries to another contractor's employee on the same project if it is negligent. Give me a little time to think of clear wording ... Daniel Case (talk) 06:12, 9 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on May 1[edit]

Schweizer Seilbahninventar

(
)

Created by Enhancing999 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Schweizer Seilbahninventar; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Leeds 13

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Mike Christie (talk) and Arnhemcr (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 21:48, 6 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Leeds 13; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Killing of Mitch Henriquez

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Https://en.wikipedia.su/wiki/User:Mike Christie (talk) and Mujinga (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:01, 6 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Killing of Mitch Henriquez; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Articles created/expanded on May 2[edit]

End Poem

(
)
Tattoo quoting the End Poem
Tattoo quoting the End Poem

Converted from a redirect by Tamzin (talk). Self-nominated at 04:31, 8 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/End Poem; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Ana Amado

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Sammi Brie (talk) and SusunW (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 22:12, 7 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ana Amado; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.Reply[reply]

Justify My Love

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Kyle Peake (talk) and 11JORN (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 19:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Justify My Love; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.