Template talk:Did you know

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
For instructions on how to nominate an article, see below.
"Did you know...?"
DiscussionWT:DYK
RulesWP:DYK
Supplementary rulesWP:DYKSG
Noms (awaiting approval)WP:DYKN
Reviewing guideWP:DYKR
Noms (approved)WP:DYKNA
Preps & QueuesT:DYK/Q
Currently on Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
Archive of DYKsWP:DYKA
StatsWP:DYKSTATS
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
April 1 talkWT:DYKAPRIL

This page is to nominate fresh articles to appear in the "Did you know" section on the Main Page, by a "hook" (an interesting note). Nominations that have been approved are moved to a staging area, from which the articles are promoted into the Queue.

Contents

Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
September 12 1
October 2 2
October 15 1
October 17 1
October 21 1
October 25 1
October 28 1
November 2 1
November 4 1
November 9 1
November 11 1
November 17 4 1
November 18 1 1
November 19 1
November 23 1
November 24 1
November 27 2
November 28 1
November 29 1
November 30 2 1
December 1 1
December 3 1
December 4 4 1
December 5 3 1
December 6 2
December 8 1
December 9 1
December 10 3
December 11 2 1
December 12 1 1
December 13 3
December 14 2 1
December 15 3
December 16 1
December 17 2 1
December 18 3
December 19 1 1
December 20 2 1
December 21 1 1
December 22 2 2
December 23 3 2
December 24 3 2
December 25 7 5
December 26 7 5
December 27 4 3
December 28 10 10
December 29 12 11
December 30 8 7
December 31 8 6
January 1 6 3
January 2 11 8
January 3 16 12
January 4 8 4
January 5 9 8
January 6 10 8
January 7 14 9
January 8 9 3
January 9 9 5
January 10 8 3
January 11 12 4
January 12 9 5
January 13 10 6
January 14 10 3
January 15 10 5
January 16 8 5
January 17 4 2
January 18 3 1
January 19 8 1
January 20 2
Total 303 160
Last updated 09:35, 20 January 2019 UTC
Current time is 09:38, 20 January 2019 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

Create a subpage for your new DYK suggestion and then list the page below under the date the article was created or the expansion began or it became a good article (not the date you submit it here), with the newest dates at the bottom. Any registered user may nominate a DYK suggestion (if you are not a registered user, please leave a message at the bottom of the DYK project talk page with the details of the article you would like to nominate and the hook you would like to propose); self-nominations are permitted and encouraged. Thanks for participating and please remember to check back for comments on your nomination (consider watchlisting your nomination page).

If this is your first nomination, please read the DYK rules before continuing:
Official DYK criteria: DYK rules and supplementary guidelines
Unofficial guide: Learning DYK

To nominate an article[edit]

Read these instructions completely before proceeding.
For simplified instructions, see User:Rjanag/Quick DYK 2.
I.
Create the nomination subpage.

Enter the article title in the box below and click the button. (To nominate multiple articles together, enter any or all of the article titles.) You will then be taken to a preloaded nomination page.


II.
Write the nomination.

On the nomination page, fill in the relevant information. See Template:NewDYKnomination and {{NewDYKnomination/guide}} for further information.

  • Not every line of the template needs to be filled in. For instance, if you are not nominating an image to appear with your hook, there is no need to fill in the image-related lines.
  • Add an edit summary e.g. "Nominating YOUR ARTICLE TITLE for DYK" and click Save page.
  • Make sure the nomination page is on your watchlist, so you can follow the review discussion.
III.

In the current nominations section find the subsection for the date on which the article was created or on which expansion began (or, if a new Good Article, the date on which it became a GA), not the date on which you make the nomination.

  • At the top of that subsection (before other nominations already there, but below the section head and hidden comment) add {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}}.
  • Add an edit summary e.g. "Nominating YOUR ARTICLE TITLE for DYK" and click Save page.
  • Consider adding {{Did you know nominations/YOUR ARTICLE TITLE}} to the article's talk page (without a section heading‍—‌the template adds a section heading automatically).

How to review a nomination[edit]

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

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

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

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

    If you are the first person to comment on the nomination, there will be a line :* <!-- REPLACE THIS LINE TO WRITE FIRST COMMENT, KEEPING :* --> showing you where you should put the comment.
  • Save the page.

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.

Frequently asked questions[edit]

Backlogged?[edit]

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 (so that those hooks don't grow stale), 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 above).

Where is my hook?[edit]

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.

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[edit]

Instructions for other editors[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

  • See Wikipedia:Did you know/Preparation areas for full instructions.
  • Hooks that have been approved are located on the approved nominations page.
  • In one window, open the DYK nomination subpage of the hook you would like to promote.
  • In another window, open the prep set you intend to add the hook to.
  • In the prep set...
    • Paste the hook into the hook area (be sure to not paste in that that)
    • Paste the credit information ({{DYKmake}} and/or {{DYKnom}}) into the credits area.
    • Add an edit summary, e.g. "Promoted [[Jane Fonda]]", preview, and save
  • Back on DYK nomination page...
    • change {{DYKsubpage to {{subst:DYKsubpage
    • change |passed= to |passed=yes
    • Add an edit summary, e.g. "Promoted to Prep 3", preview, and save

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 September 12[edit]

Timeline of Cluj-Napoca

1617 engraving of Cluj/Kolozsvár/Klausenburg by Joris Hoefnagel.
1617 engraving of Cluj/Kolozsvár/Klausenburg by Joris Hoefnagel.
  • ... that throughout its long timeline the city of Cluj-Napoca was part of many empires and kingdoms, including Roman Empire, Hungarian Kingdom, Habsburg Monarchy, Austria-Hungary and Kingdom of Romania ...? Source: "MacKendrick, Paul Lachlan (2000). The Dacian Stones Speak. Routledge Monographs in Classical Studies (illustrated, reprint ed.). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press."; Source: "Lukács, József (2005). Povestea "oraşului-comoară": scurtă istorie a Clujului şi a monumentelor sale [The story of the "treasure-city": a short history of Cluj and its monuments] (in Romanian). Levente Várdai. Cluj-Napoca: Apostrof. ISBN 978-973-9279-74-1. "

5x expanded by Codrinb (talk). Self-nominated at 20:00, 12 September 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Not eligible. List articles must have at least 1,500 characters of readable prose in order to qualify for DYK. Catrìona (talk) 05:44, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg This appears to be only the nominator's fifth nomination, and given that the article itself is long (the problem is that the content is presented as a list while DYK's length requirement only applies to prose), this could still work as a hook. @Codrinb: I would suggest you expand the lede section to be a summary of the whole article, ensuring that it is at least 1,500 characters. Once this is done, this can become DYK eligible. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi all. Thank you for the feedback. I put a lot of work into this article and I will be happy to make anything that is necessary to make it eligible. Thank you for giving me a chance, @Narutolovehinata5:. The main reason for not expanding the lead more is to keep it "in sync" and consistent with all the other articles in Category:Timelines of cities in Europe. If you look at Timeline of London or Timeline of Frankfurt, they have a similar lead. If you think that I should deviate from this, in order to achieve DYK, I will do it. I will also ping @M2545: and other users involved with such lists, perhaps there are other examples of DYK or longer leads. Thanks! Codrin.B (talk) 10:32, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi again, I have added a new lead as requested. Please let me know if this works. Thanks. Codrin.B (talk) 12:38, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
To try and help push the DYK along I have edited the article's lead. It is now at 1,623 characters. I hope that helps! --Elonka 22:47, 25 November 2018 (UTC)


Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - The grammar in the hook is weird. Roman Empire needs a definite article, as do some of the others.

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Is this one of your first five DYK noms? Catrìona (talk) 06:40, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

@Catrìona: This is the nominator's fifth nomination so no QPQ is necessary yet; however, their next DYK and beyond will require a QPQ. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:30, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. What is QPQ? ;-) How about this text and new image:
Cluj coat of arms, awarded in 1377.

Codrin.B: I would accept that if the caption were significantly shorter. 8 lines is too many. Catrìona (talk) 04:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Catrìona:. I removed less important aspects from the lead and kept the core ideas. The lead is now around 1800 characters. I hope this is acceptable. Thanks.Codrin.B (talk) 06:25, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Ah, you were talking about the image caption... I never intended it to be so long. I just added the image previously with the caption I used elsewhere. To goal was to check if this image is better. I trimmed down the caption as well now. Codrin.B (talk) 06:30, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg I recommend the wording "throughout its long history" rather than "throughout its long timeline". Catrìona (talk) 06:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
The reason I used "timeline" is to differentiate from the History of Cluj-Napoca article, which I might also work on to get it to a DYK, and also to be inline with the article title: "Timeline of Cluj-Napoca". But certainly "history" sounds better. I am fine if it has to be changed for the DYK. Thanks. Codrin.B (talk) 10:04, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svgI'm a little concerned at the amount of unsourced content here. An entry about Hadrian becoming Emperor may not need a source, but an entry about a redlinked individual such as Flavius Italicus does, I'm afraid. Vanamonde (talk) 23:02, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Actually all governors of province Dacia come out of the List of Roman governors of Dacia Traiana which in turn uses this reference: Petolescu, Constantin C. (2014). Dacia: un mileniu de istorie [Dacia: a millennium of history] (in Romanian). Bucharest: Editura Academiei Române. ISBN 978-973-27-2450-7.. I expected that this could be an issue so I started to add individual references for each governor. Thanks for bringing it up. Codrin.B (talk) 22:26, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
@Vanamonde93:, @Catrìona:, @Narutolovehinata5: - I finalized adding references to all legates, procurators and other leaders from 2nd and 3rd century. From my perspective, while it could be further improved, the article is quite well sourced for all the centuries and from a wide variety of sources. Please let me know if there is anything else I can do to make this better and get it approved. Thanks. Codrin.B (talk) 22:09, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg It's been over two weeks without any of the previous reviewers returning; a new reviewer would be welcome. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:24, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg - Length, Date, Earwigs, and QPQ exempt check. However while the article has many more citations (thank you Codrin.B for your work here) some of the facts in the hook regretfully do not have cites - for example the city being included in the Treaty of Karlowitz (Hapsburg), being part of Austria-Hungary, and the Hungarian Kingdom. Once those are added/clarified, we should be good to go. Best, Mifter (talk) 23:33, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Ok, thanks @Mifter:. I will work on those references as well.Codrin.B (talk) 14:33, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The nominator has not edited since December 12 (i.e. their comment above). @Codrinb: If you are unable to return to this nomination within a week, this will be marked for closure as stale. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, just saw this. If you could give me one more week, I will add the additional references. Thanks. Codrin.B (talk) 17:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg This article is rather "a timeline of the region surrounding present-day Cluj-Napoca" or "a timeline of Dacia Porolissensis", and not the timeline of the city of Cluj-Napoca (which was founded in the 12th century). The article either should be renamed to reflect its contents, or reverted to an earlier version which actually concerned the city itself. Whitepixels (talk) 08:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol question.svg Probably shouldn't be marked for closure just yet, the nominator has promised to address concerns, and the reasons for thhe above comment aren't insurmountable. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Codrinb: Symbol possible vote.svg This is your final ping; if there is still no response by next week, the nomination will be closed as stale. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:43, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 2[edit]

Wilhelm Kempf (bishop)

Relief bust of Wilhelm Kempf
Relief bust of Wilhelm Kempf

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 08:03, 2 October 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Good article that reads well. I've only made a couple of minor style tweaks. Checklist: hook validated directly from www.limburg.de source, ☑Y, length ☑Y, timescale ☑Y, sufficiently referenced, albeit some taken in good faith ☑Y, structure and style ☑Y. As far as I'm concerned this is good to go. Bermicourt (talk) 20:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Hello, I came to promote this, but perhaps the hook could be rewritten to make it snappier? It doesn't seem that clear right now, particularly the part that says "introduced the changes of the Second Vatican Council in which he took part". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:39, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean, - could you make a suggestion? My try (and sorry that I am not gifted with snappyness):
ALT1: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its changes in his diocese?
The council changed the church's view on/of itself dramatically, but tough to say that in few words. Or could you? Or someone watching? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:53, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
The hook seems to imply that it was Kempf who proposed the changes done in Vatican II (as in during the council itself), which is contrary to what the article says (which merely says that he introduced the Vatican II changes in Limburg). As for ALT1, I don't think it works since Vatican II was implemented throughout the Catholic world and thus being the one to introduce it in a diocese is not uncommon (disclosure: I'm Catholic so I'm actually familiar with Vatican II and the changes implemented because of it). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:11, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council?
No room to say that he enthusiastically introduced the changes, and was criticised for it, while others may have done only what they had to. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
@Bermicourt: Thoughts on ALT1 and ALT2? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:53, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
I like the source which says: "Bishop Wilhelm Kempf carried the ethos [from the end] of the Second Vatican Council, of which he was one of five sub-secretaries, to his Diocese, which - although small in area and numbers - soon set an outstanding example [in terms of the reforms]." I wonder if part of that could be woven into a hook? Just trying to help. Bermicourt (talk) 18:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, Narutolovehinata5, this has been sitting for over a month. Where does this stand now, and whose response is needed at this point? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:51, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
I was happy with the original hook, but Narutolovehinata5 wasn't and so Gerda and he or she suggested some alternatives. I wasn't convinced so I cited a source directly which I felt could be used and left the ball in Narutolovehinata5's court. To move this along, here's another suggested hook based on that source: Bermicourt (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
ALT3: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, set an outstanding example in introducing the reforms of Vatican II to his Diocese?
I struck the original, as it was explained that it's not clear whether he took part in the Council or the changes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
@Bermicourt: I kind of like ALT3 but the hook fact isn't explicitly mentioned in the source. @Gerda Arendt: , the "The church historian Friedrich Kempf [de] was his younger brother" statement lacks a footnote. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Oh dear, wir drehen uns im Kreis... @Narutolovehinata5: I've reworded the lede in line with the hook which is explicitly mentioned in the first reference of the article which states: "Bischof Wilhelm Kempf trug die Aufbruchstimmung des Zweiten Vatikanischen Konzils, zu dessen fünf Subsekretären er zählte, ins Bistum, das - obwohl klein an Fläche und Katholikenzahl - schon bald eine herausragende Stellung gewann." The article is this one. Bermicourt (talk) 08:51, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
@Bermicourt and Gerda Arendt: Again, the hook fact is not in the article. Either the article needs to be reworded, or a new hook needs to be proposed here. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I'd like to write in the article what is in a German source "er trug die Aufbruchstimmung des Konzils in seine Diöcese", but there's no good word for "Aufbruchstimmung", I asked translators and they come up with "enthusiasm", "departure", "awakening". None of them conveys "Stimmung" (= mood, atmosphere). "Aufbruch" - departure - literally means "break up". Help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
I am really sad that there's no English term for Aufbruchsstimmung. The best I find is "atmosphere for new beginnings", as if there were old beginnings. It's when crusts need to be broken to begin something new, - something like disruption ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
ALT4: that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, brought the sense of expectation from Vatican II into his Diocese, which soon became a leading light for the reforms? Bermicourt (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, but "leading light" is not in the article. Can we instead word that he took part in the Council? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's a translation of "herausragende Stellung". But only a suggestion. And I thought you wanted to include Aufbruchstimmung? Bermicourt (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
I'd think "outstanding" was better for "herausragend". Feel free to add it to the article, - I have a few other topics where I am behind. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
It's more literal, but I was trying to be more poetic. :) I'm running out of time as we're off to Germany shortly, but I'll try and look at it tonight. Bermicourt (talk) 07:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
First time I hear of "poetic" on DYK, - love it! Only, I'm afraid we are supposed to stay factual.
ALT5: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council and introduced its changes in his diocese in an outstanding way? ... in an exemplary way? ... with enthusiasm?
... instead of "changes" perhaps "new concepts"? "drastic changes"? or what? - Have a god trip, Bermicourt? I'd have Christmas music recommendations for Idstein (8, 9, 24) and Wiesbaden (16, 25), if you are in that area. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:46, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Let me have a think about that. Well our family trip is not quite that cultured. I'm going to see my boyhood favourite football team, Borussia MG, play Stuttgart. And we're all going to the Christmas market in Düss. The cultural bit is more local: the BSO's New Year Concert. Bermicourt (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Actually I still like the vitality of ALT4 and think it faithfully reflects the spirit of Aufbruchstimmung and herausragende Stellung. Maybe we should utilise "groundbreaking" since that echoes Aufbruch both literally and figuratively. How about this modification:
ALT6: that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, brought the sense of expectation of groundbreaking change from Vatican II into his Diocese, which soon became a leading light of the reforms? Bermicourt (talk) 19:57, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Good ideas, but now we have four words (sense expectation groundbraking change) before we get to the Council, - a word (Council) I'd not want to miss. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
I think we've ended up with a bit of role-reversal here lol. You're supposed to suggest the hooks and I'm supposed to comment and, hopefully, approve them! I'm sorry, I was trying to be helpful, but maybe I'm just muddying the waters. So I'll stop now and let you make the running! (but don't worry, I'm on your side, honest). GB. Bermicourt (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg no problem, it happens - also to me - when you get engaged with a topic. New reviewer: we have six ALTs to look at, and the article, nothing else ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:52, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Symbol confirmed.svg Well, well, well. I'm quite undecided between ALT3 and ALT6 but I guess I'll go with ALT3. :) Off to the preppy please. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 05:46, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you! ALT3 please, because ALT6 has parts that are not (yet at least) in the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:19, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg @Gerda Arendt and Vincent60030: Pulling, with due apologies. I think the current hook strays too far from neutral encyclopedia language. I'd be fine with just saying "introduced the reforms"; but "set an outstanding example", or the equivalent, requires also saying from whose perspective that was true; it's too heavy an editorial voice, otherwise. I would have swapped in one of the alts, but there's a similar issue with those. Vanamonde (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Did you read the above? I didn't suggest it, you have many choices, such as ALT1. - While you pulled I added to the article, supporting it ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Symbol voting keep.svg @Gerda Arendt: My apologies, I missed ALT1 (the others had the same problem as the one I pulled). I'm not going to replace this immediately, because I'm thinking it might make a good picture hook for the next prep. Restoring tick per previous review. Vanamonde (talk) 22:14, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Fine, just that - as suggested on DYKTALK - I'd prefer a photo of an exemplary Wikipedian to a plant (in prep 4), and also to bronze. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Symbol question.svg Sorry, reversing this yet again as Yoninah has expressed reservations about ALT1. Yoninah, any suggestions? Also, Gerda, while you're at it, could you fix the unsourced sentence at the end of the first paragraph in the body? Vanamonde (talk) 22:43, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    yes --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:56, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
    Note to Vanamonde: "yes" means that it was actually done, not that it could be done. Yoninah, any suggestions about what to do with ALT1 (or what to replace it with)? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
    I can't follow how ALT1 seems to imply that the changes by council of several hundred people would be his changes, - "it's changes" are the council's, many changes by many people. Clearer wording welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  • BlueMoonset per your ping on my talk page: all I said at WT:DYK was that ALT1 wasn't interesting. Looking at it again, it's okay, but not for an image slot. Now Gerda seems to be asking for different wording for ALT1. Perhaps she should set on a hook and then a reviewer could finalize it. Yoninah (talk) 17:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
No, I'd still go with ALT if you can take it, and the implication is not there. Repeating because it's so far away:
ALT1: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its changes in his diocese?
I assume that you either know that these changes were major, drastic, fundamental - you name it -, or will not care about him anyway. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you, but Narutolovehinata5 had an objection to the wording, above. Narutolovehinata5, can you help us with better wording? Yoninah (talk) 18:03, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid I won't be able to help out much here, as the topic is outside my line of expertise. My only suggestion could be to basically go with ALT1 but only focusing on his participation in Vatican II (i.e. removing the part about the changes). However, I don't know if that hook could appeal to non-Christian readers. Sorry if I couldn't be of more help. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 06:27, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Participation is something he shares with thousands of others. The fervent - enthusiastic - determined - introduction of the changes is what set him apart. Any wording help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerda Arendt (talkcontribs) 12:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
I understand why Gerda has watered the hook down, but it's a shame that the real impact Kempf made, stressed by the sources, has now been lost. The hook has become a camel: a horse designed by a committee. :( Bermicourt (talk) 20:49, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── My suggestion here would be to use in-line attribution for any superlatives attached to his introduction of the reforms, and then use that in the hook (that needs to be done in the article in any case; it's a bit too heavy a use of an editorial voice. Vanamonde (Talk) 00:26, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Bermicourt, would you do that? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Could I ask which hook we are talking about? I'd rather not spend time working on the wrong one. Bermicourt (talk) 17:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
We talk about a hook which you could word. Or we could perhaps keep it simple and say something like:
ALT1a: ... that Wilhelm Kempf (pictured), Bishop of Limburg from 1949 to 1981, took part in the Second Vatican Council, and introduced its innovations in his diocese? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I am honestly fine with that, and given the difficulty of wording the superlatives neutrally, I think I would be willing to pass this, but I don't want to unilaterally overrule Yoninah, so pinging her. Yoninah, would you be so kind as to take a look? Also: the hook may be okay, but the lead of the article does need in-text attribution, and as I do not speak German I don't want to be the one doing that. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:05, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
The lead summarizes info sourced in the body. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:15, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Yes, you're right, but the body needs fixing too. To be clear, I would object to that wording in any biography, and this has nothing to do with who Kempf was; neither "exemplary" nor "outstanding" is a word we should be using in Wikipedia's voice. I would suggest "A 2018 church biography stated that Kempf had set an outstanding example in introducing the reforms to his diocese" or something like that. Even that is borderline, because really, we need an independent source for anything along those lines. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
It's kind of independent because it's not the church saying source saying the church is brilliant c.f. other churches or organisations but the church saying one of its members was brilliant compared with other members. Bermicourt (talk) 21:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. That addresses its use as a source, but not the language issue I have described above, which is independent of the source. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:56, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • This is stuck between a rock and a hard place. The superlatives aren't liked and omitting them results in a bland uninformative hook. This could be resolved with a weasely "was said to <superlative><deed>" but that makes for clunkiness and hooks are meant to be snappy. I suggest a completely different hook to resolve this;
SpinningSpark 12:28, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer, but no. Too little to say about such a giant, and will be the hook for that choir. - ALT1 has no superlatives, - you can help by wording the article to conform with that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, no I can't, and if you stick to that the nom may end up rejected. ALT1, and just about all the rest in my opinion, are too bland to get past the "likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article" requirement. SpinningSpark 13:00, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
The sticking point is the superlatives, but since they are used in the sources, I don't see why that should be a problem. Especially as the sources are independent of the individual. Is the underlying issue that the sources are in German? If so, I'm happy to translate them as, I'm sure, is Gerda whose English is impeccable. Bermicourt (talk) 13:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

The Nature of Prejudice

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 11:25, 2 October 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg -- there is work to do here. For starters, it would be nice to have sections. And the book cover. Second, it needs a copy edit; I made a few obvious ones, but I note that the third paragraph starts with a grammatical error. In the second note the book title needs to be italicized; etc. Oh, the claim in the last sentence needs to be ascribed to someone; we can't be saying it I suppose a summary of the book isn't mandatory, but it would be nice--it's what we expect from a book article. Now, the hook is verified, the article is new enough and long enough and I smell no plagiarism, but it needs serious cleanup. Drmies (talk) 21:56, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Why I don't disagree with you, the issues you are raising are IMHO irrelevant to the DYK (now, if this was a WP:GAN, you'd be dead right). Quality issues like this are not part of the DYK requirements. I am of course happy if people would like to expand things, but I don't believe it is necessary. Btw, I don't see the grammar error. Also, I don't see the need for attribution (the sentence is cited, after all). Lastly, academic books don't have plot summary sections, the content of the book is already summarized. I guess we could add a chapter list? PS. I did add an infobox (through again, it is not required for a DYK; it's not like I am self-assessing this article any higher than start, maybe C-class...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Piotrus, we've danced this dance before. I'm happy you wrote this up, it's important, but if we're putting it on the front page it should be representative of our quality. The grammar error is in "Describing the book significance"--needs to have a genitive for "book". I didn't say "plot summary", I said summary, and the only thing the article says about the book is the one sentence about some scale. The rest is all caught up inside reviewers' remarks. Having a summary is a Good Thing. I don't care about the infobox, BTW, though lots of people do. And the attribution, that is necessary. That it's cited is beside the point: what matters is that an opinion is cited ("One of the reasons for its success"), and it may be a very reasonable and well-argued opinion, but it's not a fact. Thus, attribution. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Drmies Yes, we danced this indeed, and as I am sure I said it before, your standards are too high for DYK. If you see a grammar error, please fix it. I am not a native speaker and occasionally I don't see them. I stand by what I said - all your other requests, while all beneficial to the article (except the attribution, which I say is not needed through harmless) are not required for this to be on the front page. If you have a problem with that, try changing DYK requirements/guidelines. Ping User:BlueMoonset for 3O. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
    Well, I am not a native speaker either, and I'm not your copyeditor. Yngvadottir, thank you so much for looking over the article, and for the attribution--which of course is necessary, given NPOV. Good day Piotrus. Drmies (talk) 13:50, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed; check should include whether the article still needs a copy edit. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
I looked, and don't think we can have a book article not saying (besides the lead which should be a summary) who wrote it when and why and about what. All reviews are interesting only in relation to that. - Formally, under a section header, a person's name should be repeated, so probably also a book's. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Added a sentence on author/date in the main body. I don't recall any source discussing why the author chose this topic, I am afraid. (Probably he found in interesting, like most authors writing about whatever they chose...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg There is work to do here.

  1. Article creation date and length are appropriate.
  2. The hook has issues. "Is considered a seminal work on prejudice" seems weasel-worded despite the citation. The hook should describe who viewed the book as seminal. Aspects of the book's content would make an even better hook, since they are more obviously neutral.
  3. The article's sources are reliable, but its neutrality has issues. Please clarify using reliable sources that the book was universally acclaimed from its publication, or describe major disagreements with and shortcomings of the book.
  4. Finally, please report your QPQ.

La comadreja formerly AFriedman RESEARCH (talk) 04:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@La comadreja: QPQ is already out there. I don't see the what is a neutrality issue. ALL reviews I've found are positive, and praise this work highly. I'd be happy to include critical reviews - if you could only point them out to me? I think given the level of praise cited, seminal is fine, but if you'd prefer, here is an alt:
ALT1: ... that the 1954 book The Nature of Prejudice is considered a classic that defined the field of intergroup relations?
It should also address the issue of saying more about the book contents through its link to intergroup relations.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:30, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
How about a slightly different wording: ... that the 1954 book The Nature of Prejudice is considered by social psychologists to have defined the field of intergroup relations? --La comadreja formerly AFriedman RESEARCH (talk) 17:08, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
@La comadreja: Hmmm. The thing is, I am reasonably sure people from other branches of social sciences would also consider it as such. That said, I checked and both Pettigrew and Katz seem to be social psychologists as is Laurie A. Rudman. Dovidio is, however, in a department of psychology (not just social). Glick's official title is just a professor of social sciences ([1]) through of course sp is a major area of his expertise. I am not opposed to your proposed change, but I do want to caution you that the hook as proposed, while linking to social psychology (which is nice), could also be creating the false impression that the book is not recognized as important outside this narrow field. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:49, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Sure. How about ... that the 1954 social psychology book The Nature of Prejudice defined the field of intergroup relations?
Nice, do you think we can add the word classic? Consider ALT2: --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:55, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that the 1954 social psychology book The Nature of Prejudice is considered a classic that defined the field of intergroup relations?
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer hasn't edited since last month. New reviewer requested to take over. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:00, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 17[edit]

Neo-Bechstein

Created by Scope creep (talk). Self-nominated at 03:41, 17 October 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg--
  • Plagiarisation and Close paraphrasing is very-evident.
  • semi-acoustic instrument, with the sound being generated in the traditional way by striking strings is copied in toto from the source.
  • Although having no sound board, it was much lighter is copied in toto from the source.
  • Original research
  • Usage of the words:-- micro-hammer, eighteen microphones et cetera.
  • Many lines are un-sourced. They are (probably) sourced in some of the references but as much as inline cites are not required, it's optimum to use them.
  • Prose form is quite poor.
  • The Construction section starts with:--The was semi-acoustic instrument which is meaningless.
  • The Marketing section again starts with:-- Bechstein reportedly built 150 copies of which exist today which is meaningless.The same can be said about the last line:-- and was restored in 2007 at the technical Museum Vienna ready to play and is used for concert purposes.
  • The entire paragraph reads like a marketing brochure of the piano (viz The stop has been refined by the micro pounding...., This avoids the knocking noise...... et al).A lot trivial details ( that typically hit the string at a force of 5%....) are noted.
  • Additionally, the term neo-petrof is used out of nowhere and is not even wiki-linked/ explained at a foot-note.
  • I have no idea about the 4th source.
  • This can be improved, quite a lot.Use the press-reviews and exploit the many rigorous sources which mention it, without getting bogged down into trivialities.And above all, copy-edit whatever you have written till now. (I will try to invest my own efforts, if possible:-) )
  • On a note, I have not even bothered to find out about QPQ:-)WBGconverse 07:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks WBG. That was bit of a wake up call. I never realised it was so bad. Thanks. Is it possible to take each in turn,
  • I can get rid of the plagiarism by rewording.
  • Regarding mirco hammer, I took this from the image, No. 5, mikrohammer. I thought that would be self evident. I have explained mechanics.
  • The stop has been refined by the micro pounding, technical detail of the first electric piano.
  • 5% was what made it unique, and its mentioned in a few sources. Explained.
  • I have reordered it and tried to address the points raised. scope_creep (talk) 08:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
  • QPQ doesnt seem to apply, as this is my first DYK. scope_creep (talk) 13:44, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
  • @Winged Blades of Godric: @Scope creep: What is the status of this nomination? It has been one month since the nominator's last post. I glanced at the page and see just a block of text. Subheads are the first thing needed. You may wish to apply for copyediting help at WP:GOCE. Yoninah (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yoninah I think this DYK can probably be closed. I submitted it far too early. I started the article very late at night when I was sleeping, and submitted it, when it still needed a lot of work. user:Winged Blades of Godric came in, reviewed the DYK and rewrote the article, which I thought was nice and really cool and I copy-edited later, and later still added sections as requested. I don't think DYK is for me, as I tend to take some time to create an article, usually months, e.g. Platt Report 1959. Thanks. Please close this. scope_creep (talk) 00:24, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • @Scope creep: actually, with your reorganization, the article looks in better shape now. I'd like to re-review it in a little while, as it seems Winged Blades of Godric has recused himself by rewriting the article. I have added him to the DYK co-credits. Yoninah (talk) 08:02, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
ok scope_creep (talk) 09:16, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • OK, I've gone over the article and added a few "citation needed" tags to information that needs to be sourced. I would also like you to suggest a new hook – something that will "hook" the reader's interest, not an explanatory sentence. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 16:55, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I will update the article tomorrow. Yip, any help with the hook is cool. scope_creep (talk) 21:37, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Yoninah that is the citations added to the article as requested. There from a journal article, that discusses the design of the piano.scope_creep (talk) 16:28, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
To try and get this nom "unstuck", how about the following Alt?
ALT2 - ... that because the Neo-Bechstein electric grand piano was built without a sound board to dissipate energy, it was described as having "organlike expressive possibilities"?
Best, Mifter (talk) 06:24, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Pinging Scope creep. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 11:30, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Yip, that looks good. scope_creepTalk 12:26, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Think the paraphrasing is still a bit close in places - for example, "organlike expressive possibilities" warrants quoting. Also, could page references be added to the book sources? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Nikkimaria: How are you? Happy New Year!! Will do, but it will be a few days. I am on slow time at the moment. I think organlike expressive possibilities is a direct quote. I can find the person who said it. scope_creepTalk 00:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Nikkimaria: I have taken away the close paraphrasing, added a references, and added the page numbers per. scope_creepTalk 00:58, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Nikkimaria: I have fixed that last page number that was missing as per instruction. scope_creepTalk 03:40, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Great. Looks like the issue of close paraphrasing has been pretty well sorted. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:41, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check ALT2 and the article in general; previous reviewer is now listed as a contributor. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:21, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg New enough and long enough. The main hook sounds ok but would be snappier with "that was" removed, but in any case it is unacceptable as the university is not even mentioned in the article, let alone cited. Similar problem with ALT2, the "expressive possibilities" quote is not in the article. No copyvio detected in current version. The two photographs are suitably licensed, but the keyboard transmission scheme diagram is under fair use. I don't think this is compliant with Wikipedia guidelines. The diagram is not historically significant (as opposed to the mechanism itself), the author played no significant part in the article subject (if he did, why isn't he mentioned) and, most importantly, a simple diagram like this is easily reproducible as an svg file (the preferred format for diagrams). Losing the German language annotation would also be beneficial on the English Wikipedia. Two previous DYK credits so QPQ not needed. SpinningSpark 13:55, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 21[edit]

Social entrepreneurship in South Asia

Created by Wickersong (talk). Self-nominated at 23:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - no
  • Interesting: Red XN - not really

QPQ: Red XN - not needed, users first DYK
Overall: Symbol delete vote.svg Beeblebrox (talk) 21:42, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg I’m concerned with the overall quality of the writing. There are several passages containing broken, unclear, or confusing language, and I have to agree with the tag regarding undue weight. This is certainly a valid topic for an article, but this article seems a bit narrow and focuses only on a few specific organizations. This does not necessarily disqualify from from DYK, but it isn’t optimal to have such an article featured on the main page. Also, please provide a source which directly verifies the hook. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:27, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Beeblebrox, I'm currently working on this for an educational assignment and so am in the midst of heavily revising this article. I will work to address the issues with writing quality as well as undue weight as I expand on this article and improve upon it. Hopefully then it can be optimal. I also fixed the hooks up a bit more to hopefully make it more interesting and added citations. How quickly do I need to revise this article to still have it up for consideration? Wickersong (talk) 23:15, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Once you’re “in the system” so to speak I think you’re good as far as timing, there isn’t really a deadline. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • @Beeblebrox: The nominator hasn't edited in over a week; have your concerns been addressed? If not, and/or the nominator doesn't return soon, I will mark this for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
The hook and alt are now cited, so that’s half of it, but the article itself hasn’t been improved. I’m afraid they took my comment about timing a bit too literally, obviously it is expected that the issues will be fixed at some point but it looks as though they’ve walked away for now. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:51, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi all I am working on it today and over the next few days/this week to improve the article itself. I've been unable to work on it because of school. Happy to get any more feedback @Beeblebrox: and @Narutolovehinata5: as I revise. Will let you both know once I've reached a good point with this article. Wickersong (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
@Beeblebrox: and @Narutolovehinata5: I've revised the article quite a bit. Please review and let me know whether there's anything else I should fix in order to perfect my nomination for DYK Wickersong (talk) 16:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed; it has been over a month since the reviewer or (pinged) checker has been here. Reviewer should be sure to check previously raised concerns have been sufficiently addressed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Not a full review, but through a cursory skim through the article, it still reads more like a policy paper of some kind than an encyclopedia article. The hooks still aren't too interesting, and seem to focus more about other subjects than the topic of the article itself. Suggesting that hooks about entrepreneurship in South Asia itself be proposed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:31, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 25[edit]

1994 Gambian coup d'état

5x expanded by Ira.morga3 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:32, 25 October 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Ira.morga3: The article was nominated the day 5x expansion happened, so it meets the date criterion. I wasn't able to find any close paraphrasing. This is the nominator's first nomination so a QPQ is not required. Although I suppose both hooks are potentially interesting, I have concerns with both: for the first, I'm not sure if bloodless coups are really unusual as I'm aware it's happened before in other places. The second hook might be too obtuse for people unfamiliar with political science: it would be advisable to add a link to Waves of democracy in the said hook. Otherwise, both are cited inline: ALT0 reference is verified, while I can't access ALT1's source so for now it is accepted AGF. The article is of an appropriate length, but I would suggest that the "The Paradox to the Third Wave of Democratization" section be rewritten in a more neutral tone. As for the "The Paradox to the Third Wave of Democratization" claim itself, I would suggest that some background be written about it (i.e. who formulated that term, and in what context) as the term is discussed rather abruptly. I would also suggest that the "Coup" and "Discontent in the Gambia" sections be switched (i.e. "Discontent in the Gambia" comes before "Coup", to give background). This will be good to go once these issues have been addressed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:45, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Note: copied from article talk page on 23 December 2018: @Narutolovehinata5: Thank you so much for your feedback! I agree with your observation that the second hook might be a bit too obtuse for the average reader with no political science background. Perhaps instead I could use the hook "... the Coup was met with almost no opposition, both internally and internationally?" instead? I also made a few of the corrections you suggested (except for the Third Wave Democratization section, which I have not yet started to correct but I plan to). Ira.morga3 (talk) 06:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Have the issues been fixed Ira.morga3? VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 07:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
  • A series of edits were made to the article by the nominator in early December. Narutolovehinata5, did these address any of the issues you raised? Where does the nomination stand now? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 13:54, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
I was aware of that, I was just waiting for the nominator to make a response here (which so far they have been unable to do). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:23, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
*@Narutolovehinata5: @BlueMoonset:Sorry for the delay in response, I have been home for the holidays and haven't checked my emails/notifications too often. And while I edited this page as a requirement for my course, I found myself loving this assignment and hope to continue editing for Wikipedia. But to answer the initial question, yes the changes were made and I made additional edits (to make the article flow a bit better and to make it seem like one coherent piece rather than a collection of facts). Ira.morga3 (talk) 07:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Just wanted to note that Ira.morga3 added comments on November 24 and December 23 to the Talk:1994 Gambian coup d'état page, where this nomination is transcluded, rather than here on this page. I have inserted them above, so that they are all in one place, where the DYK reviewers will see them. Ira.morga3, if you could reply here going forward instead of there, that would help. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the above. The article looks a lot better now, but there are still some typos here and there (including a case where there's a space before a period). This will be good to go once it gets a nice copyedit. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:19, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on October 28[edit]

Rosalinda González Valencia

Source: "En 1996 Rosalinda González Valencia se casó con el que se convertiría en el hombre fuerte del Cártel Jalisco Nueva Generación, Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes / [English]: "In 1996 Rosalinda González Valencia married the one who would become the strong man of the Jalisco Cartel Nueva Generación, Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes." (El Universal) [English] "Known as “El Mencho,” Oseguera has risen to become Mexico’s most-wanted drug lord after Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman was extradited to the United States last year to face trial." (Reuters)

Moved to mainspace by MX (talk). Self-nominated at 21:32, 29 October 2018 (UTC).

  • The hook really says nothing about her. Yoninah (talk) 00:14, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I disagree. Either way, she's best known for being married to El Mencho. What do you suggest I do with the hook then? MX () 03:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Although I suppose the hook is interesting, I see Yoninah's point. It implies that that's her claim to fame, as opposed to something that she did in her own right. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:53, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
From what I've gathered, being married to El Mencho is what she is best known for. The majority of the sources have esposa (English: wife) on the titles. That means her marriage with El Mencho is what the sources find most notable to describe her. The Latin American drug world is still very male-dominated, so I'm not surprised sources describe her like this on their titles. MX () 17:26, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
If being a spouse is what she's best known for, wouldn't that fall under WP:NOTINHERITED? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:19, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
No. She's received significant coverage for her suspected role in the CJNG as well (but sources always start by introducing her as El Mencho's wife, which brings us to my original point). If I were to propose a hook about her alleged criminal activities, this would get flagged on NPOV violations. I'm thinking we could also copy any of the hooks of her brother (except ALT0 and ALT4, which does not apply to her). Any thoughts? MX () 21:59, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Honestly I'm not a fan of the hooks proposed here as they seem to focus more on other people than herself. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:00, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that the trial of Rosalinda González Valencia is held behind closed doors because the Mexican government is presenting sensitive evidences about a drug cartel? Source: [Spanish] "Los fiscales de la PGR solicitaron al juez Zeferín Hernández llevar la diligencia a puerta cerrada porque la secrecía de los datos que expusieron es clave para el éxito de la investigación que realiza contra el CJNG." / [English]: "Prosecutors from the PGR asked Judge Zeferín Hernández to take the trial behind closed doors because the secrecy of the data they exposed is key to the success of the investigation carried out against the CJNG." (El Universal)
  • ALT2 ... that Rosalinda González Valencia has 17 siblings, giving rise to their clan nickname "Cuinis", referring to a prolific local ground squirrel? Source: [Spanish] "Los Cuinis son un grupo delincuencial conformado por miembros de una misma familia que inició sus operaciones a principios de los 90 ... El sobrenombre de esta familia se debe a una ardilla de la zona a la que los lugareños conocen como cuiniki , su particularidad es que en cada parto suelen tener de 12 a 14 crías." / [English]: "The Cuinis are a criminal group formed by members of the same family that began operations in the early 90's ... The nickname of this family is due to a squirrel from the area that locals know as cuiniki, its peculiarity is that in each birth they usually have 12 to 14 offspring." (El Economista)
  • Here are two new hooks. Not sure if ALT1 is NPOV compliant, but that's the one I like the most. ALT2 is meh since it loses the impact of the previous hooks. Let me know what you think. MX () 14:53, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
The best option here might be ALT2, but it needs to be reworded as its flow is very abrupt. I don't like ALT1 as closed-door trials are not uncommon and in fact are the norm in some countries. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Would you be kind enough to reword it the way you think it should be? Have no idea what you're talking about. Thanks, MX () 16:14, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I'd probably drop the part about 17 siblings and instead focus on the clan nickname part. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Got it. At that point the impact of the hook is lost... MX () 16:38, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Or if you really want to do the 17 siblings part, you'd probably need to drop the squirrel nickname part instead and say something about the siblings as a whole. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
At that point we're stuck with Yoninah's initial concern that the hook says "nothing about her". Not sure what other hooks to suggest without being on the borderline of a NPOV / BLP violation. I'll be out of town in a week with no access to Wikipedia until 2019. Hopefully we can come to a resolution soon. MX () 23:27, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Thoughts? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:11, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The nominator is currently not available and won't return until after the new year, other editors are called to take a look at this nomination for now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 2[edit]

Economic history of the Philippines under Ferdinand Marcos

Former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos
Former Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos
  • ... that the Philippine economy under Ferdinand Marcos faced its first major economic crisis because of heavy government borrowing in the lead-up to Marcos' 1969 re-election campaign? Marcos assumed the presidency only in 1965, when things started to spiral downward in the late 1960s as existing policies no longer encouraged rapid growth. The would-be dictator then pursued an aggressive, expensive run for a second term by foraying into the public treasury to boost his campaign, buy votes and threaten voters. The peso crashed in late 1969, and by the dawn of the following year it lost half its value, Conrado de Quiros wrote in "Dead Aim." ....The 1960s crisis, for economists Arsenio Balisacan and Hall Hill, "was triggered by one politician's particularly shameless efforts to maintain a grasp on the reins of the political machinery. - Diola, Camille. "Debt, deprivation and spoils of dictatorship
    • ALT1:... that the Philippine economy under Ferdinand Marcos saw GDP go from nearly 9% growth in 1976, to a recession where the economy contracted by 7.3% for two years, 1984 and 1985? Source:Gross domestic product (GDP) growth peaked right after Marcos’s declaration of Martial law in 1972, reaching nearly 9 percent in 1973 and 1976, partly driven by a commodity boom when the prices of major Philippine commodity exports like coconut and sugar went up. However, it was also under Marcos when the country hit the worst recession in history: a 7.3-percent contraction for 2 successive years in 1984 and 1985, as his grip on power waned. - Guido, Edson Joseph; de los Reyes, Che (2017), "The best of times? Data debunk Marcos's economic 'golden years'", ABSCBN News and Public Affairs
    • ALT2:... that the nosedive of the Philippine economy under Ferdinand Marcos in 1983 traces its roots to debt-driven growth, mostly during Marcos' second term, and during the earliest years of martial law? Source: "This strategy of borrowing heavily was “peculiar to the Marcos period” and carried great risk, De Dios said. It “produced historically impressive growth,” but also “created the conditions for the big collapse later,” he added....The turning point came when the US entered a recession in the third quarter of 1981 and increased interest rates, bloating the cost of Philippine borrowings. Debt servicing then became very difficult for Manila, as with other debt-dependent countries in Latin America. The economy began to decline in 1981, proving debt-driven growth was unsustainable. The country’s exports at the time failed to keep pace with the ballooning debt. - Guido, Edson Joseph; de los Reyes, Che (2017), "The best of times? Data debunk Marcos's economic 'golden years'", ABSCBN News and Public Affairs

Created by Alternativity (talk). Self-nominated at 08:55, 7 November 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg - It appears the article was move to another name. Alternativity, can you please update the hooks to reflect the new title (if needed)? Thanks, Mifter (talk) 07:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I have adjusted the links and the DYK template with the new page name. Yoninah (talk) 14:27, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg It appears that this has stalled for more than a month and nominator has not returned. Opting for closure. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 09:37, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Have just notified nominator on their talk page; as this hadn't been done previously, allowing a full seven days for a response. If we don't hear from Alternativity by then, the closure process can resume at that time. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Were Yoninah's changes to the link what was requested? (I thought they were, but I could do further changes if needed.) To be honest I have no idea what to do with the fact that the article was moved while under consideration for a DYK. The process is now a bit confusing to me. So I would totally love suggestions. - Alternativity (talk) 11:06, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Oh. I have just seen that the article seems to have been moved once more after the changes Yoninah made. Will rethink how to change the wording of the hooks. - Alternativity (talk) 11:09, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi everyone. Submitting proposed what revised hooks I can come up with:

I'm not as happy with them as the originals, but perhaps you have suggestions for how to improve them? Thanks. - Alternativity (talk) 11:27, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that new hooks have been proposed. I've taken the liberty of removing the date range as unnecessary, and changing "Economic history of the Philippines" to "Economy of the Philippines" because it's the economy, not its history, that is the subject of the three revised hooks.) BlueMoonset (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Acknowledged with thanks! I'll add that the sources for each hook are quoted in the relevant original version above. (I'll also add that I don't actually have a marked preference for any of the hooks - even Alt0. They were just the facts that seemed most hookworthy to me.) - Alternativity (talk) 04:41, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 4[edit]

Oranges & Lemons (album)

  • ... that XTC's 1989 album Oranges & Lemons reimagines 1960s psychedelic music with modern instrumentation and technology? Source: "Partridge's ethos for this album appears to be a continuation of the Dukes Of Stratosphear aesthetic -- exploring the sound and colors of their '60s influences -- but he makes the unfortunate step of trying to filter it through modern instrumentation and technology." (link)
  • Comment: save for February 27, 2019 (the date of the album's 50th anniversary)

5x expanded by Ilovetopaint (talk). Self-nominated at 20:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Nominator's first nomination so no QPQ needed. Earwigs gives a >70% score but that's because of the quotations, that are cited inline. This will be good to go once the Singles section is sourced. Unfortunately, per the special occassion hook guidelines, special date requests should generally be made no more than six weeks before the requested date, and February 2019 is too far away. Thus, the request has to be respectfully declined. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:01, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Done (removed the singles section) --Ilovetopaint (talk) 18:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm sorry about that. I got pretty busy and wasn't able to get back to this. I'll try taking another look by tomorrow. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:19, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
@Ilovetopaint: This is almost ready for approval, just add a general footnote to the Personnel section and this will be good to go. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:22, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Footnote for what?--Ilovetopaint (talk) 23:24, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
@Ilovetopaint: The "Personnel" section lacks references for the staff. A single footnote to the liner notes or something could work in this case, though. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:42, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 Done--Ilovetopaint (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ilovetopaint: The footnotes are still missing from the Personnel section. I'd also suggest adding footnotes for the track listing. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:57, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 11[edit]

Class of 2018

Nash Aguas and Sharlene San Pedro
Nash Aguas and Sharlene San Pedro
  • ... that the 2018 Filipino action-thriller film Class of 2018 is the first-starring role of Sharlene San Pedro and Nash Aguas (pictured), who used to do sketch comedy in the variety show Goin' Bulilit when they were little...? Source: "Former “Goin’ Bulilit” stars will reunite in the upcoming action thriller “Class of 2018." (link)
    • ALT1:... that the 2018 Filipino action-thriller film Class of 2018's director Charliebebs Gohetia chose Nash Aguas and Sharlene San Pedro (pictured) as the lead cast because he believes people want them to work together as a love team...? Source: "we decided ‘Okay let’s give it to Nash and Sharlene.’ It turns out there has been a clamor for their love team" (link)
    • ALT2:... that the 2018 Filipino action-thriller film Class of 2018 is a fulfilment of the NashLene fans' (derived from the names of the lead cast Nash Aguas and Sharlene San Pedro (pictured) wish...? Source: "The movie is kind of a dream come true for NashLene fans because they’ve been crying for the two young artists to have a love tandem on screen." (link)
    • ALT3:... that the main cast of 2018 Filipino action-thriller film Class of 2018 were the same people who used to do sketch comedy in the variety show Goin' Bulilit when they were little....? Source: same as main hook.

Created by 001Jrm (talk). Self-nominated at 08:13, 11 November 2018 (UTC).

  • Thanks for claiming, I guess. ^^ Here's my pre-comment: ALT1 and ALT2 may sound fancruft-y but I can't say the same for the main hook/ALT3. The main cast started young (like kids aged 4yrs up) and they had a show (Goin Bulilit) wherein they do comedy and sitcom. The same kids (who are now 19 yrs up) were given the lead roles for the first time and it's action-thriller (so much different from comedy). Fun fact: Usually in the Philippines, rom-com or coming-of-age genre is given for actors' first starring films (link of the actress explaining how people hope for them to do a coming-of-age film) because moviegoers tend to want to watch it more than suspense/action/thriller. That's also the reason why "love teams" are a thing in the country; thus, ALT1 and ALT2). SO I think my hooks are based on plain facts, which I just reworded to make it more interesting. Thanks! :) 001Jrm (talk) 07:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Another issue is that these hooks might be interesting to a broad audience. As a Filipino myself, the hooks focusing on Goin' Bulilit (obscure outside of the country) may not work out for international tastes. I'd suggest you try proposing hooks that don't involve Goin' Bulilit or the love team. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • How 'bout...
  • ALT4:... that the 2018 Filipino action-thriller film Class of 2018's director Charliebebs Gohetia describes his film as a first in the Philippine cinema because he reinvented the genre in which he mixed multiple genres into one film?
  • ALT5:... that Nash Aguas and Sharlene San Pedro (pictured), who were given their first-starring roles in the 2018 Filipino action-thriller film Class of 2018, were initially told they were going to play the second lead characters? 001Jrm (talk) 05:09, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @001Jrm: Okay, I apologize for the delay as I have been busy with real-life work. Right now, I don't think the article as it stands is ready. First of, the "Mallshows and TV guestings" section is unreferenced, and arguably is merely trivia. At best the content could instead be shortened and included in the "Marketing" section. Secondly, is there no information about how well the film did in the Philippine box office? And third and most importantly, the article is a bit hard to read, with awkward grammar and paragraph constructions. I'd suggest that the article be given a copyedit, perhaps by the people at WP:GOCE, before this can push through. For the proposed hooks, my preference is ALT5, but at more than 220 characters, it is far beyond the 200 character limit and thus has to be made more concise. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:05, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and made a request at WP:GOCE. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:56, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The copyedit was done a few days ago, so this is ready for another look. The nominator hasn't edited since last month though, so this has to be taken into account during the nomination. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:30, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I was waiting for the copyedit so I didn't touch the article unless asked to. I went for a vacation afterwards in mid-Dec so I wasn't able to reply. Sorry for not replying right away. For the mallshows, I have the sources for the "Mallshows and TV guestings" section but I thought I wouldn't need to add them one by one as I just mentioned them. As per your suggestion, I put everything under "Marketing" section. For the box office, I see some blogs/Facebook pages about it though I don't know where to get the original/valid source so I left it blank. Lastly, there's this one copyedit wherein I don't know what do to since I just quoted it directly from what the director of the film. Should I interpret it (which I think is not possible) or just leave it?
  • ALT6:... that Nash Aguas and Sharlene San Pedro (pictured), who were given their first-starring roles in the 2018 Filipino thriller film Class of 2018, were initially given the second lead character roles?

001Jrm (talk) 04:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I still feel that ALT6 might be a bit too long, but I'll accept it if there's no way to make it shorter. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:25, 12 January 2019 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on November 17[edit]

Geology of Hong Kong

Geological map of Hong Kong. Green is volcanic rocks, red is granitic rocks.
Geological map of Hong Kong. Green is volcanic rocks, red is granitic rocks.

5x expanded by HarrietHKUGeology (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 21:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - No inline citation
  • Interesting: Green tickY

Image eligibility:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg This article needs major work before it's ready for DYK. SounderBruce 05:34, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg I'm marking this for closure. This was completed as an assignment and the creator hasn't edited since November 22. The nominator has been editing, but they have not returned to this nomination. SL93 (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Graeme Bartlett: Are you still willing to continue this nomination? Courtesy ping to Jo-Jo Eumerus as they have an editing interest in volcanoes. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    Sorry, but right now I have little interest in Hong Kong volcanoes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I will do some work today on this. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
      • All sections now have a reference and it is copyedited. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
        • There are still paragraphs in the Sedimentary rocks section that lack inline citations. The citation drop is also rather mediocre, as I don't think a single citation can cover each and every one of these paragraphs 100%. A spotcheck will be needed. SounderBruce 17:01, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
          • Graeme Bartlett, the third paragraph under Igneous rock is still not supported by a citation. Once that's taken care of, we can ask the reviewer to resume. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:05, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Graeme Bartlett: It's been a week now. Have you been able to address the concerns raised here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
    • I have added a couple of citations to these paragraphs. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:57, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @SounderBruce: Ping. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
    • First three paragraphs in the "Igneous rocks" section and first paragraph in the "Sedimentary rocks" section still have uncited sentences/paragraphs. The article is also in need of copyediting, since I can see lots of formatting/MOS issues from a quick look. SounderBruce 07:35, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Hydrothermal mineral deposit

  • Reviewed: Khukri Rum
  • Comment: Part of Regional Geology course at HKU

Created by Alexgiovi (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 22:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC).


Policy compliance:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Article needs better sourcing overall GiantSnowman 17:00, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Note: it has been over a month since the review was posted without any response here. Will be pinging the nominator on their talk page and allowing the usual seven days for a response. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 19[edit]

Cynthia García Coll

  • ... that Cynthia García Coll has shown immigrant children were more likely to graduate if they lived in states that granted TANF benefits to low-income immigrant families?

Source: [2]: "Using data from the 2002 Educational Longitudinal Study, a study of more than 16,000 U.S. school students, one of us, Alexandra Filindra, worked with Cynthia Garcia Coll and David Blanding to explore how these state-level welfare policies affected the children of immigrants. In states that granted TANF to low-income immigrants, graduation rates for children who had at least one foreign-born parent were 5.3 percentage points higher than those in states that excluded them."

Created by QuakerSquirrel (talk). Nominated by 28bytes (talk) at 22:32, 20 November 2018 (UTC).

  •  Working GMGtalk 13:49, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I started on this and then got super busy. It's Thanksgiving this weekend in the US. But if I can't get it wrapped up this weekend, I will by Monday at the latest. GMGtalk 22:48, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
  • @GreenMeansGo: No worries! I appreciate the work you've done on it already. Enjoy your Thanksgiving! Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Incidentally, I've shot an email to the subject to see if she can publicly publish fairly mundane personal details in a way that we can cite on Wikipedia. Probably 80% chance she doesn't respond, but we'll see. GMGtalk 00:13, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Just jotting down my thoughts before the family gets awake and moving this morning. (Apologies for probably being more anal retentive than your average QPQ.) It looks like the link to the original study in the WaPo piece is broken. But as far as I can tell, this is the only paper these three authors have published together. I don't see where the 5.3 statistic is in the original piece (or a rounded "5.2..."). So that's a little odd.
My intuition is that "TANF" is probably overly specific for the hook. It's very Ameri-centric (and an acronym that most Americans themselves probably don't recognize). Besides, the study also seems to include fairly prominent attention to the effect of Medicaid access, and the implicit suggestion seems to be that these findings should be generalizable to other similar programs. I'm fond of the succinct wording of this passage: "The children of immigrants are more likely to succeed educationally when they live in states that include immigrants into their welfare net."
So maybe something like "...that research by Cynthia García Coll and colleagues have shown that immigrant children have more educational success when their families have access to the social safety net?"
That's riding the line of close paraphrasing a little bit maybe, but hopefully sticks close enough to bare information presentation that wouldn't be a problem. (There's only so many ways you can say that exact information accurately.) GMGtalk 14:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Your suggestion looks great to me. Unfortunately, I'm very new to all of this & don't know how to go in and change the hook. If you are able to change it, that would be great. Let me know if not. Thanks! QuakerSquirrel (talk) 16:49, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Hey, no worries QuakerSquirrel. Thanks for helping us build a better encyclopedia! I'll wrap this up over the next couple of days and just make sure we're ready for the main page. GMGtalk 17:08, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I'll just go ahead and give it the tick Symbol confirmed.svg for the alt hook since nobody has raised any objections. New enough, long enough, hook supported by news and journal source, copyvio is all titles she's held and titles of works. If there's any last minute polishing to be done on the article I'll knock it out while it's in the queue. GMGtalk 20:25, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks GreenMeansGo! I really appreciate all the work you've done improving the article. Cheers, 28bytes (talk) 21:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi Vincent60030. I'm open to different wording or a different interesting fact to highlight. What do you suggest? 28bytes (talk) 14:55, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @28bytes: Can't really suggest a hook but how about adding some comparison with american citizens and like from being backlogged to surpassing them or some sort? VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 15:07, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Just to be clear Vincent60030, are you referring to both the original hooks and the suggested tweak? GMGtalk 18:52, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 23[edit]

The Aboriginal Mother

  • Reviewed: Ma'adin Ijafen
  • Comment: While I believe this topic as a whole is interesting, I'm having a hard time coming out with a good hook for DYK. It may be better to combine some of these or condense them in some way.

5x expanded by SkyGazer 512 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg I agree with your concerns about the hooks. Would it be better to contrast the grief expressed in the poem with the newspaper was telling white settlers to "shoot them dead" ? Find bruce (talk) 06:28, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

@Find bruce: Thanks for the review. I'm having a hard time incoporating your suggestion into a decent hook format. Do you have any specific suggestions?--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:58, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
How about ALT5:... that "The Aboriginal Mother" expresses grief about the massacre of 30 Aboriginal Australians at a time when the Sydney Herald told white settlers to "shoot them dead"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Find bruce (talkcontribs) 00:38, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed for ALT5, since it was proposed by the original reviewer. (Note: since this is an article about a poem, I've added quotes to the poem title in the hooks; I've also added quotes around "shoot them dead", since it's a direct quote from the Herald.) BlueMoonset (talk) 14:28, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Bluemoonset. SkyGazer 512 had included the quote marks around the title, but I had removed them. Thanks for fixing my mistake. I was waiting to see if SkyGazer 512 wanted to comment on ALT5 & I am happy to help with any tweaks to the hook. As you say though, a new reviewer is required. Find bruce (talk) 23:54, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Hmm, I must have accidentally removed this from my watchlist. It was not on there previously, apparently, which is why it took me so long to reply again; my apologies. I'll explain this in much more detail and tweak the article tomorrow when I have more time, as I'm about to go to bed now, but before this is approved I would like to point out that the content of ALT5 isn't currently in the article exactly as the hook words it, solely because I misread information from the book. Thank you for the review and the new suggestion, and again, I'll be onto this tomorrow.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
@Find bruce: Ok, so I misread what the Sydney Herald had said because the book was unclear; apologies for that. To me it seemed like the book was contrasting how the poem was peaceful about the murder of the Aboriginals but the Sydney Herald was telling people to shoot the white settlers dead. However, looking at the actual newspaper article, it seems like they're saying that if the Aboriginals perform a similar action to "you" as the white settlers did in the massacre, to shoot them dead. The hook might should clarify this a bit further. I'll let you respond with more details before I modify the article in this respect.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:52, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

─────────────── @SkyGazer 512: it's easy to see how "filthy savages" fits more easily with the murderers than the victims & I have clarified this in the article. I am not seeing why ALT5 would need to be clarified. If you are referring to the qualification listed by Herald about property destruction or murder, the article was published on 14 November 1838, after the 1st trial & before the 2nd when there was no allegation that the white stockman were defending themselves from attack. Further the article refers to Aboriginal Australians in dehumanising terms as cannibals and savages. Thus despite the opening protestations, in my view ALT5 accurately reflects what the thrust of Herald was saying, to excuse their killing. Find bruce (talk) 00:16, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

@Find bruce: Thank you for the explanation and for what you changed in the article. If you think ALT5 is okay, then I don't think there is a problem with that due to your helpful clarification; it certainly is a lot more interesting than the hooks I suggested.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:32, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I think its ready to go, but a new reviewer is needed for ALT5 Find bruce (talk) 23:26, 14 January 2019 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on November 24[edit]

Eugène de Mirecourt

Eugène de Mirecourt
Eugène de Mirecourt

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 23:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is long enough, new enough, interesting hook and QPQ is done. However, there are some passages in the “Life” section that need citations: last sentence of 1st passage; entire 3rd passage; last sentence of 4th; 5th and 7th passages. —Al Ameer (talk) 04:50, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
I hope I did. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:42, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg Thanks Gerda. This nomination is good to go now. —Al Ameer (talk) 15:44, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg @Gerda Arendt: @Al Ameer son: with apologies Gerda, because you are the awesomest of awesome Wikipedians, but per the discussion at WP:ERRORS2 I'm going to have to pull this one from today's queue and bring it back here to the nom page. The criteria for DYK are clear that the hook facts must appear in the article, and they must be directly inline cited. If it's possible to bring the 100 biographies thing into the article along with the specific names like Berlioz, then great. Otherwise maybe there are other hooks that could be made? Happy to help if I can expedite this back to the queues once the issues are resolved, just give me a ping. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 22:08, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, when I commented out unreferenced things, I commented out too much. Brought the 100 and the two names back, with a cite for each, - please check. Kind of ironic that the article was created to not leave a red link on FA Berlioz ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Amakuru, I forgot the ping. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Ha, that makes a bit more sense now then. I did think it strange that the fact wasn't mentioned at all! So now it comes down to The Rambling Man's point that although the source names 100 volumes of the work, its not clear that there were 100 biographies. With the names listed in your Wikisource link, it does seem that the statement is true, but without the direct 3rd party citation we're not quite there yet I think... It's a tricky one.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
"Les Contemporains" translates to "The Contemporaries". Overdue for bed. Please go to the French Wikisource (bottom right) where you have all 100 names, and say how to quote that?? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:25, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I'm not too sure to be honest. Maybe we can accept it under the good faith assumption that the page at Wikisource is true to the original source, which none of us have seen? It might be worth asking the question at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to get an opinion on that. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 09:29, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

You can see the original for Sand and Berlioz, no? You can see the original for several - the first - entries. You can look for the others among the 699 entries in the German National Library. - The words Good Faith are rarely used, thanks for that ;) --
I'm getting confused. Did this get pulled from Prep 6? We had a long thread at WT:DYK. That which is on Wikisource, is first uploaded at Commons. So, c:File:Mirecourt - Gavarni.djvu is the original scan of all 102 pages of that book that exists on Wikisource. Just look at the drop-down arrow on the right-hand side of that Commons file. There's also c:Category:Eugène de Mirecourt other works and images. Other than that, I think what's being discussed above is out of my field of knowledge. And I don't read French. Hope this has helped in some way. — Maile (talk) 00:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth, SashiRolls, and Yoninah:, @Narutolovehinata5:, @Gerda Arendt:, @Amakuru:, @Al Ameer son:. I was just browsing through that book I linked above that is on Commons. Skip to about page 97. Again, I don't read French. But there seems to me to be pages of listing of names on Pages 97 through 101, which might be a list of the biographies he wrote. Does that help solve this mystery? — Maile (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
And another thing. Look at the bottom of the Miracort article where it says "Authority Control". Click on the VIAF link. There's an itemized list of his works at VIAF. It shows a lengthy list of bios he wrote. — Maile (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the searching, and it looks promising. However - and I also don't read French - if it's just a list of names, it doesn't confirm (at least for the sceptics) that the texts under the names are biographies. LouisAlain, does the book say they are. - The article about this man began because the article about Hector Berlioz said Mirecourt wrote the first biography about the composer ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Tell that The Rambling Man, not me ;) - That list still gives titles only, without saying that what he wrote were biographise. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


Articles created/expanded on November 27[edit]

Israeli occupation of the West bank

  • ... that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, along with the Gaza Strip, is the longest military occupation in modern times? Source: "The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza is the longest military occupation in modern times"
    • ALT1:... that under the Israeli occupation of the West Bank Palestinian Arabs are governed under military law and Israeli Jews under civilian law? Source: "From the occupation's very beginning, the ethnicity of the individual determined both the legal system to which a person would be subjected as well as whether the letter of the law would be enforced at all. Whereas both the land and its Palestinian inhabitants have been subjected to military rule, the Jewish settlers who took over the expropriated land have been subjected to Israeli civilian law."

Converted from a redirect by Nishidani (talk), Nableezy (talk), and NSH001 (talk). Nominated by Nableezy (talk) at 01:47, 28 November 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg All the easy stuff is fine here: the article's newness, its length, the hook format, and QPQ. However, as documented on the talk page, good-faith disputes about the article's neutrality began almost immediately after its creation and have continued for almost two months, with the latest action occurring this week. That's not something a DYK reviewer can ignore or brush aside blithely. Sometimes, an article's issues can be addressed in response to a Symbol question.svg or Symbol possible vote.svg. Unfortunately, there's no basis to expect that here, and so I'm forced to reject it. This will no doubt disappoint the nominator and authors; it would certainly disappoint me, if I were in their shoes. If it's any help, I would suggest they reflect on what they would consider the appropriate response to a DYK nomination for an article titled (for example) Security threats to Israel originating in Palestinian territories whose neutrality they had spent seven weeks disputing on its talk page. I realize that this perspective limits the scope of what can appear in DYK; taken to an undue extreme, it would allow only entirely anodyne topics. DYK should—must—have room for uncomfortable, even controversial, topics. However, that must be balanced against the requirement that the Main Page only feature content for which there is a consensus that it meets Wikipedia policy. Right now, and for the foreseeable future, that consensus is absent for this article. Lagrange613 04:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
    • No, the article is impeccably neutral. Some editors on the talk page have tried to argue that it isn't, without success. The article has been remarkably stable since it was moved to mainspace, and that is what matters here. We go by reliable sources here – and the sources are of impeccable quality – not by what what your or my opinion might be of its neutrality. --NSH001 (talk) 08:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Military occupations, by their nature, are always unpleasant for their victims (the people occupied). Not surprisingly, RS report that unpleasantness. Pleaase don't confuse "neutrality" with refusing to report that unpleasantness. Where else in Wikipedia do we fail to report the brutal nature of military occupation? --NSH001 (talk) 09:40, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
    • I agree with the reviewer the article is not neutral and can't be neutral in near feature for example Jewish connection to the area is completely omitted --Shrike (talk) 12:09, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Actually, the reviewer's remarks are themselves completely neutral, and refreshing to read. I say this as main writer of that article. What he states, quite objectively, is that the article's neutrality is disputed on the talk page, not that he agrees with its lack of neutrality, (or considers it neutral). As to the hypothetical Security threats to Israel originating in Palestinian territories, were I to have edited such a page (I would probably ask for a title change: Israel as a state suffers no security threat from the WB, but Israelis have in the past been subject, within their national boundaries, to very severe threats from West Bank terrorists in quite a number of devastating attacks), I would certainly list in detail my objections, edit to ensure that the presentation was well-sourced and objectively set out and, if it were then proposed to cite a fact from it, I imagine I would have no objection. One cannot object to facts, however uncomfortable. As the present article states, polls surveying the issue have concluded that most people are not familiar with the fact that the West Bank is occupied, and, I guess (since I prefer not to 'vote' or 'promote' this DYK) there are many who would prefer this objective datum to not be known more broadly. So be it. The important thing is that the fact is registered somewhere on a world-wide global encyclopedia, and that it is not lost in the evitable confusion of so much polemical-partisan spinning.Nishidani (talk) 13:09, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Lagrange613:, editors are free to write Security threats to Israel if there are reliable sources supporting such an article. This article has such reliable sources, and the idea that a few people on the internet find what those sources report to be uncomfortable means that we should not have a a DYK makes little sense to me. I actually dont think there have been any good faith disputes about the neutrality of the article. There are a few people making wholly unsupported claims without any actual sourcing, users engaging in OR, users wishing away the existence of an eminently notable topic. But what we do not have is any actual evidence of a neutrality dispute. Shrike's comment above is an example of that. Jewish connection to the area is completely omitted? Uh, what in the actual fuck does that have to do with the military occupation of a territory by a foreign power? Your comment, that there is not consensus that this article meets Wikipedia policy, is likewise wholly unsupported. nableezy - 17:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, one might well disagree with Lagrange's assessment, but I think it rather clear that in referring to no 'consensus' he is stating a fact: several people expressed deep unhappiness with the article, albeit in terms so generic and vague that to me, at least, it amounted simply to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. But, it was reasonable enough for Lagrange to argue that the talk page indicates a lack of consensus (one that was inevitable). The gravamen of what you, NSH001 and indeed I are saying is that insisting that a NPOV consensus on a talk page is obligatory for a DYK (admittedly I have zero knowledge of such processes) opens up a difficulty, in that political dislike can effectively cancel out the publication of a fact no one, beginning with the government of Israel, denies. Nishidani (talk) 18:21, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
There were several well reasoned objections to the rather serious POV problems on the page. A number of editors who attempted to rectify POV, as well as misrepresentation of sources, have seen their edits blanket reverted. That said editors are not edit warring over the challenged material does not mean the article is in a reasonable state. Security threats to Israel (and Jews inside and outside of the West Bank) should be covered in the article - this being one of the main reasons for the continuing occupation - I migjt work on this.Icewhiz (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Those suggestions are patently untrue. The 'rectifications' were shown to reflect stark ignorance of the topic and were analysed and replied to in detail. There were no follow-up responses of any textual significance. Security threats to Israel - a disarmed population constituting an 'existential threat' to the most technologically sophisticated and powerful army in that part of the world- have nothing to do with the occupation, but as our reviewer has suggested an article along those lines, editors who have that concern should address it by creating such a page. I only hope the sourcing standard is on a par with the one adopted here, and that care is given to setting down, as here, the factual record, not hearsay, editorializing opinions, government spin and talking heads' chattering.Nishidani (talk) 21:51, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
Just to be clear, I was proposing "Security threats" as a thought experiment for the primary authors to help you understand why I couldn't approve the DYK. I was not "suggest[ing] an article along those lines," and I certainly was not suggesting that the different camps should retreat to their own articles where they can make the points that matter to them. WP:POVFORK rules that out specifically, and quite right, too. "If you don't like the tone of this article, go write your own" is entirely contrary to how Wikipedia is supposed to work. It is on editors to work with each other, assuming good faith even when they disagree with each other's arguments or perspectives, to produce an encyclopedia in which nobody owns articles and each article reflects a neutral point of view. An article on a contentious topic that is not produced in this spirit is unlikely to merit display on the Main Page. Lagrange613 03:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
And to be clear, the article is owned solely by the method adopted, which is designed according to the strongest sourcing criteria at WP:RS, something almost universally ignored in the I/P area. The 'camps' referred to split along that line: scouring for sources that reflect one's POV, or scouring sources that provide the essential facts of a conflict, something that can be seen at a glance by comparing the percentage of recentist newspaper sourcing to long-term retrospective analysis by competent specialists. (2014 Israel–Gaza conflict is 80% based on newspaper hearsay dismissed now as misleading. The article was a splendid example of assuming good faith sinking assuming the real facts must be established) Editors here generally do not 'work with each other', unfortunately, because the criteria for encyclopedic composition are contested: some think the fundamental guideline must be 'representing national POVs' with equal weight (irrespective of the weighting of sources). Israel said this, the PA said that, utterly tedious. The problem has always been to accord priority to the factual record, which is least disputed, rather than privilege the interpretative spin placed on that record by commentators official or otherwise. Since all those objecting to the article want two contradictory things (a) radical reduction of the length and (b) major expansion of the official Israeli position, a compromise couldn't be worked. I took out 7,000 bytes as a compromise and in response 7,000 bytes were added, uncompromisingly. Facts were to be eliminated, and replaced by a standard set of memes available in all official literature. If you do not want a factual article, my advice was, then write up an article with the official viewpoint's outlines given in detail, but don't try to displace factual content with ideological content. Lastly, a large number of articles on controversial topics have been written basically by one or two hands because the AGF and methodological issues made all attempts to find a reasonable compromise impossible if the article in question was to be written to GA or FA standard. To assert that all articles must be premised on collaborative compromises by parties to 'camps' before they are accorded NPOV sounds ideal: in practice, it is in my experience, impossible.Nishidani (talk) 08:06, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Alexina Maude Wildman

Created by SkyGazer 512 (talk). Self-nominated at 17:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC).

  • The full review will be to follow, but my preference would be the original hook. Though I think it might be a bit too long and thus would need to be shortened somewhat. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: I like original hook as well and I do agree that it needs to be shortened. I'm not able to think of many good ways to do so without removing key information, however. Do you have any specific suggestions? I do think we could probably change the first part of the sentence to something like "that Alexina Maude Wildman wrote one of the most widely read columns in The Bulletin at the time," which would shorten it a bit.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 02:13, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
What about something like "that Alexina Maude Wildman wrote one of the most widely read columns in The Bulletin, despite editor and co-owner J. F. Archibald's belief that women could not write poetry?" Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Looks good; added as ALT4 (ALT3, see below). Thanks! With the exception of ALT1, which I don't really like that much, I personally am neutral about the hooks; ALT2 and ALT3 (ALT2) seem(s) sort of quirky and unique, but I do think the part about Archibald's belief that women could not write poetry in ALT4 (ALT3) is nice as well. I'd be fine with whatever the reviewer thinks is best.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 04:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Actually, it seems that I misread the part about the Philip May cartoon. I've removed the hook now and modified the ALT# of the others accordingly. Thanks to Krelnik for pointing that out; it makes a lot more sense that way!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:32, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Are you still planning on doing a full review? Either way's fine, it would just be nice to know.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Actually I am. I apologize for the delay, I've just been busy with other things. Just give me a moment. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:04, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

────────────────────── That's fine, there's no rush.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - The hook fact for ALT4 doesn't have the in-line citation, and the hook is slightly inaccurate: the hook affirms that it was one of the most widely-read columns, but the article states that it was likely to be such.
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Green tickY
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg My preference is ALT4, but as I more-or-less proposed it, I'll leave the final approval to another editor. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Added the extra inline cite; the same ref is already cited 3 times in the paragraph, including shortly after the sentence, but I suppose it's better to have too much verification than too less for DYK hooks. I've modified the hooks (ALT0 and ALT3, that is) a bit to better match what the source said per your suggestion, see Special:Diff/872984527. Do you have any more issues or will you go ahead and request a new review for someone uninvolved to approve ALT3 (which you call ALT4 here)?--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:50, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
As mentioned above, I'm requesting a new reviewer to see if ALT3 is good or if any of the other proposed hooks are better. Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg I prefer ALT2 (I don't see an ALT4). It took me fancy. VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 09:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
@Vincent60030: "ALT4" here would be ALT3; it was originally "ALT4" but got renumbered after an earlier hook was deleted (see above). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:05, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg icic, anyways to reinstate this haha go ALT2! VincentLUFan (talk) (Kenton!) 14:27, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg We might need a new reviewer here as Vincent has been unable to respond to various requests to return to this nomination. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 28[edit]

Loschbour man

Skeleton of Loschbour man
Skeleton of Loschbour man
  • ... that Loschbour man, an 8000-year old man found in Luxembourg in 1935 who represents one of three groups from which most Western Europeans descend, had dark skin? Source: brown skin, European ancestry

Created by Dr Aaij (talk). Self-nominated at 04:48, 29 November 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I remember reading about this in the news a few years ago, thanks for creating the article! It is new enough, long enough, neutral, and well referenced. Hook is interesting and verified with reliable sources. Image is freely licensed. Awaiting QPQ. -Zanhe (talk) 01:06, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks, good to go. -Zanhe (talk) 06:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg I have pulled this from the queue per the discussion here. Gatoclass (talk) 13:15, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Gatoclass, I'm not sure where you want this hook to go. "...that DNA suggests that Loschbour man, whose 8,000-year old human skeleton found in Waldbillig, Luxembourg, in 1935, had dark skin?" is fine with me. Dr Aaij (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 29[edit]

Sammy Woodhouse

Created by Wumbolo (talk). Self-nominated at 20:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg - Hi Wumbolo. I was in the process of reviewing this, but am concerned that this article might fall into WP:BLP1E as it looks like coverage of Woodhouse is solely around this (horrific) occurrence. Best, Mifter (talk) 00:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Mifter: the last paragraph in the Activism section talks about her recent petition to change a law, which seems a bit separate from the previous interviews and coverage. That's how I found out about her and wrote the article. This is my logic here about the notability, and if you disagree you may take it to AfD. wumbolo ^^^ 06:16, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on November 30[edit]

Hamdan Qarmat

Created by Cplakidas (talk). Self-nominated at 15:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Red XN - The hook is only interesting to people who know already what a "Mahdi" or the "Fatimid Caliphate" are but is not really catchy enough to attract other readers. How about something simpler like ALT1: ... that Hamdan Qarmat founded the Qarmatian movement? or ALT2: ... that Hamdan Qarmat began the Qarmatian movement in opposition to Abdallah's claim to be Mahdi?
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Hook still needs work (see above), other than that looks good. Some of the later parts of the article would probably fit beter in Qarmatian. Regards SoWhy 10:48, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, I rather disagree that recognizability is a criterion; I don't know most of the terms or names I read in DYK, that's precisely what it is for: to encourage people to click on them and find out more. Anyhow, the bit about who Abdallah was is necessary, as the name is ubiquitous in Islamic history; being the founder of the Fatimid Caliphate is a way to distinguish him, and, for those who know a bit about the context, place Qarmat as well in context. For understandability/catchy-ness, one could replace "Mahdi" with "Islamic Messiah", however. Constantine 11:28, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 1[edit]

Earth's circumference

  • ... that Earth's circumference around the poles is almost exactly 40,000 km and 360 × 60 nautical miles long, because it was used to define those units of measurement...? Source: Flying Magazine. April 2008. pp. 90–. ISSN 00154806 Parameter error in {{issn}}: Invalid ISSN..: "The kilometer, which is the foundation of the entire SI or “metric” system, was originally intended to be 1/10,000th of a quadrant of a meridian — that is, 1/40,000th of the earth's polar circumference — and was established as such in 1793... The nautical mile, like the kilometer, is a unit based on the dimensions of the earth. It is the length of one minute of arc along a meridian. (The meridians are the lines that run from pole to pole on the globe; the other ones are called parallels, and minutes of arc on them shrink toward the poles.) One minute of arc is 1/21,600th of a full circumference, and so the polar circumference of the earth... is 21,600 nautical miles."

Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Self-nominated at 18:33, 1 December 2018 (UTC).

  • @Onceinawhile: Symbol delete vote.svg In case you missed it, Long enough – the prose portion is at least 1,500 characters. Right now Earth's circumference is only 522 characters of "readable prose size". Umimmak (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi @Umimmak: many thanks. I was still building the article - my fault for posting here before it was ready. I have finished now, but need to await the outcome of an AfD. Onceinawhile (talk) 01:00, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
@Onceinawhile: okay thanks for the heads up. Ping me once that has been resolved and I'll go through the review. Umimmak (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi @Umimmak: the AFD is closed and the article is much more fulsome now. I will update the QPQ shortly. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:36, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
@Onceinawhile: Any update on a QPQ? SL93 (talk) 07:08, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
@SL93: QPQ now done. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:38, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Also the "source: to come" Umimmak (talk) 08:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
@Umimmak: Now added. Onceinawhile (talk) 09:55, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

@Onceinawhile: Thank you for your patience with me over the holidays. Review is forthcoming:

  • New enough at time of nomination. Long enough, even subtracting text originally written for other articles.
  • Article is neutral in tone. All images are appropriately licensed. No apparent copyright violations. Earwig just picks up text from other Wikipedia articles, but there is proper attribution in the edit history.
  • Every non-lead paragraph needs a citation -- there are a couple one-sentence "paragraphs"; either add a citation, incorporate them into another paragraph, or expand the paragraphs with referenced statements.
  • You've added a source in your DYK nomination, but you haven't actually added a reference for this statement in the article itself. Ideally you'd have a source for the judgement that it's almost exactly that number of units as well.
  • Hook is properly formatted, and I think interesting for a general audience, although I wonder if there might be ways to rewrite it -- perhaps being explicit about what the "them" is which is being defined (i.e., those particular units of distance). I'm not sure if the use of x for multiplication in 360 x 60 follows WP:⋅.
  • QPQ is done.

Symbol question.svg Please fix the issue regarding the lack of reference in the article for the text supporting the hook and for the two unreferenced non-lead paragraphs and ping me. Everything else seems fine. Umimmak (talk) 20:00, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Umimmak: thank you for your review and for your patience with my response. I believe I have now addressed all the points raised - both in the article and the book. Best regards, Onceinawhile (talk) 07:52, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

What is the most common search phrase used by the users? That should dictate the answer to the question earth's or of the earth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.202.180.17 (talk) 15:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 3[edit]

Darlene Lim

Created/expanded by Tarselli (talk). Self-nominated at 18:08, 7 December 2018 (UTC).

General eligiblity:

Policy compliance:

  • Adequate sourcing: Red XN - 2 items in the list of awards and honors need refs; DOB is unreferenced and should probably be omitted (or the day and month dropped) per WP:DOB; no ref for her American citizenship
  • Neutral: Green tickY
  • Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - It'd be good to see the little things fixed: the quotations don't need ellipses before them; the dashes should be em- or en-dashes and en-dashes in year-ranges; "Hawaiʻi" should either have an ʻokina in it (use {{okina}} or copy/paste from here) or nothing, but not an apostrophe; some refs need their |work= or |publisher= set (and removed from the |title=) and dates where known; the all-caps journal paper title should be reduced to sentence case.

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - More linking in hooks ALT0 and ALT2 would be good.
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg @Tarselli: I slightly prefer the first hook, but I'm happy to approve any of the 3 if the sourcing items are addressed. (I'm happy to do the "little things" myself if you want.) Nice work — it's always good to see more women in STEM turn blue :) I note you're a Wikimedia Fellow; I'm happy to wait until you're back on the clock before the edits come in. I'm not in any hurry — good work takes time. Please {{ping}} me to get my attention with any replies. OwenBlacker (talk; please {{ping}} me in replies) 01:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 4[edit]

Weewarrasaurus

  • ... that the first discovered fossil of the dinosaur Weewarrasaurus was noted for being preserved in shining green-blue opal...?
    • ALT1:... that the first discovered fossil of the dinosaur Weewarrasaurus was found in a bag of opals by an opal dealer, and later donated to a museum...?
  • Comment: Author exempt from QPQ

Created by Lusotitan (talk). Self-nominated at 00:46, 6 December 2018 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - n
  • Interesting: Green tickY

QPQ: Red XN - N/A
Overall: Symbol question.svg It's a neat article and a good summary of the source material. The hooks are interesting but do not quite reflect the two sources used, for example, using words that are found in neither of them. However, that is fixable. Of more concern is that the images used in the article appear to be copyrighted despite the CC 4.0 licences displayed on Wikimedia Commons. However, I am no expert on copyright, so would like a second opinion on that. If we can sort those 2 issues out, I'll do a final check and it should then be good to go. Bermicourt (talk) 21:01, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

I'm assuming the problematic word in the first hook is "shining", since the paper describes the opalization as "green-blue" in the "Preservation of LRF 3067" section, and it makes it abundantly clear it's talking about the holotype, which is the first discovered specimen (using "type specimen" or "holotype" here might be confusing for general readers, hence the wording change). Regarding "shining", the news article uses "sparkly", and I figured "shining" in this context meant essentially the same thing, so I used a synonym so as to not rip the description straight from another authors hook on the subject. For hook two, "bag of rough opal", "opal dealer", and "...donated to the Australian Opal Center, a Lightning Ridge museum...". Not sure what else in these hooks could be not reflecting the sources, it just leaves "noted" and "found" which are very obviously implied actions in both sources. Regarding the images, I'm reasonably certain all images published through PeerJ papers are good for Wikipedia use, but licensing isn't my strongsuit. Paging IJReid to help clear things up. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 01:31, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Symbol possible vote.svg Having taking advice here it seems that the images are freely licensed on the original website, so that problem has gone away. However, there are doubts about whether the principle source is WP:RS and also that the discovery is WP:TOOSOON to be accepted in the scientific field. That being the case, we shouldn't really be showcasing it on the main page. So I don't feel able to sign this off, but I've left it as a "maybe" rather than a "no" in order to give other more expert editors an opportunity to comment. Bermicourt (talk) 21:08, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
I would dispute on both points. Palaeontology is a field of study where quality secondary sources are not available in the vast majority of cases. Published papers are considered the standard for reliable sources in WP:DINO. Regarding it being "too soon", it being preserved in opal is factual. The part that could be not accepted in the field is the existence of Weewarrasaurus as a valid, non-dubious taxon. But if it was considered dubious in a later study, the page would continue existing (dubious species still get their own pages most of the time, like with the relevant Fulgurotherium) and its status as a fossil preserved in opal and found in a bag of them would not change. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 21:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer has not replied in three weeks and has not commented to rebuttals of their concerns. Anybody else? Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 18:49, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
"Reviewer has not replied in three weeks" because reviewer said in his last comment that he wanted to "give other more expert editors an opportunity to comment". Please read what has gone before. Bermicourt (talk) 22:22, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough, but that still leaves this in need of a new reviewer. Lusotitan (Talk | Contributions) 23:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Sarlacc's Pit cave

  • ... that the largest striped karst cave ever found has been nicknamed Sarlacc's Pit? Source: "The cave is the largest known of its type, a variety of "striped karst, which is marble interspersed with other types of ancient ocean rock, she said." and "The entrance to the cave, nicknamed 'Sarlacc's Pit' by the helicopter crew who discovered it, is seen in an undated handout photo." (both sentences from CBC article)
    • ALT1:... that no one will know until 2020 whether the newly discovered Sarlacc's Pit cave is actually the largest cave in Canada? Source: "The exact depth and size of the cave has not been determined... future exploration of the cave is being considered in consultation with BC Parks, and that a team is likely to be fielded in 2020. (from Canadian Geographic article) and "A newly discovered cave in a remote valley in British Columbia might be the country's largest." (from CBC article)

Created by 70.67.193.176 (talk).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg - Thanks for creating this nomination and your work on the article! Looking at it for DYK, there a number of things that have to be done in order for it to be ready to run on the main page. First, there are a few sections that are without any/adequate citations. Also, there are a few tags expressing concerns over the article's tone, general phrasing, among other things that need to be resolved. Please let us know if you have any questions or would like us to take a look at any changes. Thanks again, Mifter Public (talk) 02:18, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Hi Mifter Public. Thank you for the note. I was surprised to see your comment about unreferenced sections since I had put a reference on each sentence. But then even more surprised to see the article! People have added a TON of stuff to it since I nominated it. I am overwhelmed and not sure what to do or where to start. Some questions for you:
  • The article name was changed, does that make it ineligible for DYK now?
  • Do all the additions now make it ineligible, or is there anything that can be done? I do not want to erase anyone else's work, obviously, and I think it's cool so much has been added. But I have no idea where the other people got their information from. What would you suggest?
  • I think I could fix the tone tag through copyediting. But how would I fix the tag about a contributor with a conflict of interest? Whoever that contributor is, it is not me, and I suppose that tag has to stay there as long as they have contributed content to the article.

Articles created/expanded on December 5[edit]

Chino Roque

Created by Arius1998 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:37, 5 December 2018 (UTC).

Never mind the fact that the tag is still on the page, so far Chino Roque only links to one other article -- as part of a dubious and unreferenced paragraph. Still doesn't cut it for me. You have to resolve it yourself, I'm afraid. Kingoflettuce (talk) 06:41, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

An additional comment: perhaps "if" would be better than "when", since it doesn't look like the flight is happening any time soon. Also, the hook fact must be explicitly present in the body, and not the lede alone. Kingoflettuce (talk) 03:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

  • I have no problems with the proposed changes. Thank you for your review. Arius1998 (talk) 14:55, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Kaede Hondo

  • ... that Japanese voice actress Kaede Hondo decided to pursue a career in acting because she did not initially know that the word "make up" referred to cosmetics? Source: [3] (本渡:小学校の時に校外学習があって、そこで通りすがりのおばさんに「あんた化粧映えするよ」と言われて(笑)。その時は化粧映えという言葉を知らなかったので、後程調べたところ「私は女優さんになれるんだ」と思っちゃって。それから段々とやりたくなってきました。)
    • ALT1:... that Japanese voice actress Kaede Hondo was inspired to pursue a career in acting after a childhood incident where she did not know that the word "make up" referred to cosmetics? Source: Same as ALT0

5x expanded by Narutolovehinata5 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:30, 5 December 2018 (UTC).

  • I will review this in a short time. Flowerpiep (talk) 19:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Flowerpiep
  • Symbol question.svg @Narutolovehinata5: The prose portion was expanded more than fivefold and is long enough. The expansion happened on the same day as the nomination. The article is neutral. The sources are cited with inline citations, but here I would like to make three mentions: the reference from the lead section should be placed in the body of the article, the reference from number 35 has an error related to its date, and the link used in the reference for the Handa-kun/Miyoko Kinjo part from the first table does not seem to mention this character and this series (thus, a new reference should be used). Also, the external link to the official site does not seem to be working. No copyvio or plagiarism found. Regarding the hooks, both of them contain fewer than 200 characters. They are interesting, neutral, and cited with an inline citation that appears in the article. However, they are a little confusing in their current state. How about something like ALT2: that Japanese voice actress Kaede Hondo decided to pursue a career in acting because she misinterpreted what she was once told? or even something like ALT3: that Japanese voice actress Kaede Hondo decided to pursue a career in acting due to a misunderstanding? I believe a hook similar to ALT3 would make the readers check the article to find out how the misunderstanding happened. QPQ done. No image. I would like to mention that this is my first DYK review, so if anyone believes that something else should be mentioned, they are more than welcome to intervene. Flowerpiep (talk) 11:36, 14 December 2018 (UTC)Flowerpiep
@Flowerpiep: Thanks, all of the article issues mentioned above have been addressed. I'm fine with your proposed hooks, in particular ALT3, but if we're going to go with them instead of the ones I proposed, we'll need a new reviewer to check them out. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:51, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg As I am fine with Flowerpiep's suggestions (ALT3 in particular), we'll need a new reviewer to check it out. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 6[edit]

1975 Holton-Arms School Senior Prom

Dancing at the Holton-Arms Senior Prom
Dancing at the Holton-Arms Senior Prom

Created by Chetsford (talk). Self-nominated at 01:13, 7 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough (created and nominated on 7 December), long enough (prose over 2,000 characters), and neutral. The images are freely licensed (Public Domain as work as White House photographers). QPQ satisfied. However there are 2 issues: 1) The citation/attribution needs work: most of the content appears to derive from the Vanity Fair article, which is not cited at all in the Background section (the "Presidential Child's Play" reference is trivial). 2) None of the proposed hooks are interesting to a broad audience: most readers will have never heard about the school (Wikipedia has a global audience), and would care even less about Susan Ford's high school dates, and the cost is trivia. The most obvious "hooky" fact is ignored: this was the only school prom ever held at the White House. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. I agree with Animalparty. The fact that the prom was held at the White House should definitely form part of the hook. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 13:24, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: On the contrary, I think the hooks work very well because they're banal, especially ALT2. They make the article stand out and clearly invite the reader to find out more. Kim Post (talk) 20:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: I appreciate the review but agree with Kim Post that the banality of the hooks is the only point of interest. The definition of "interesting" is "likely to arouse curiosity." To say "X was the only high school dance held at the White House" is not a hook but is, rather, just a one-sentence summary of the article and - as such - unlikely to produce many clicks since the gist has already been communicated in the DYK box. In other words, the suggested hook is likely to inform but is unlikely to "arouse curiosity." The current hooks are unlikely to inform but are likely to "arouse curiosity." Our primary mandate with hooks, as I understand it, is arousal, not information (the articles themselves fulfill that role). Chetsford (talk) 00:57, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

R. Hari Kumar

  • ... that R. Hari Kumar served as commissioning GO VIII of INS Ranvir and commissioning GO of INS Kuthar?
    • ALT1:... that R. Hari Kumar commanded the Coast Guard Ship C-01, the missile boat INS Nishank, the Rajput-class destroyer destroyer INS Ranvir, the Kora class missile corvette INS Kora and the Centaur class aircraft carrier INS Viraat?

Moved to mainspace by Nivas10798 (talk). Self-nominated at 07:02, 12 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg One issue with the article is where it says he went to the US Naval College in 1966, when he would have been four years old. What year is this supposed to be, since there isn't a reference? Also, the hooks are not only super boring but overuse specialist terms, so are not interesting to a wide audience. Kumar's college career seems to be most widely interesting stuff, so how about:
Kingsif (talk) 19:25, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
@Kingsif: Thanks for correcting the year 1966. It was 1996 and I made the mistake. Your suggestions for DYK are really interesting. Can you please help me in renominating those statements for DYK? Thanks in advance. Nivas10798 (talk) 16:22, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
@Nivas10798: This is how you nominate them, a review can be like a discussion. You pick which one you prefer (I like number 3) and that will get approved. Kingsif (talk) 16:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
@Kingsif: I like number 3 (... that R. Hari kumar attended the US Naval War College while already serving in the Indian Navy?). Thanks for the help. Nivas10798 (talk) 08:46, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg With the date now corrected, approve ALT3: ... that R. Hari Kumar attended the US Naval War College while already serving in the Indian Navy? Kingsif (talk) 19:24, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg @Kingsif: Per Rule H2,, you cannot approve your own hook. Could another reviewer take a look at this? Yoninah (talk) 22:02, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 10[edit]

Saint Sebastian Tended by Saint Irene

  • ... that paintings of Saint Sebastian Tended by Saint Irene (example pictured) reflected the position of both Catholic and Protestant churches that people should not flee to avoid the plague? Source: Sections 50-54 in Hedquist, Valerie, "Ter Brugghen’s Saint Sebastian Tended by Irene," Journal of Historians of Netherlandish Art 9:2 (Summer 2017) DOI: 10.5092/jhna.2017.9.2.3, fully online

Created by Johnbod (talk). Self-nominated at 04:00, 17 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg While not exactly a DYK issue, there seems to be something off about the article: the part about depictions in art comes before the discussion of the incident itself? Seems to be the reverse of what I normally read in articles about incidents in Christianity. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:03, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Firstly both are covered in the lead; there is very little to say about the brief early account the images are based on. Secondly this is not a scriptural episode, as most standard scenes in Christian art are, so the sort of section setting out the biblical references etc cannot be expected. The subject essentially only exists in art and hagiographical literature, after a certain date, and the depictions in art, as well as the plague connection, are the main subjects of continuing interest, and therefore the article. As far as I know there are no liturgical references, devotional practices etc relating to it, and little if anything in terms of theological commentary. Obviously the main Saint Sebastian is the main article for the life anyway. Johnbod (talk) 13:26, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review still needed of nomination. Thank you. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:40, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

The Princess Saves Herself In This One

Created by Jisbell2 (talk). Self-nominated at 19:14, 10 December 2018 (UTC).


Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - no
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol delete vote.svg The article does not appear in the hook? Hook not adwquately cited. Also contradictory information (is it 2016 or 2017?) and some NPOV ("very heavy"). No QPQ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiantSnowman (talkcontribs) 19:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

GiantSnowman, this editor is editing through a college course and has no prior DYK experience. In cases like this we generally try to help them as they are not only new to DYK but also to Wikipedia generally. Also, as they are new (with no prior DYKs), there is no QPQ requirement. Best, Mifter Public (talk) 05:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Also, it looks like the user recieved some feedback from their course instructor/Wiki Ed about the nom. Mifter Public (talk) 06:15, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
@Mifter Public: good spot on QPQ, I've amended accordingly. GiantSnowman 08:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
I took the liberty to pipe, - not that I like that, but we need a link to the article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
ALT1: ...that in The Princess Saves Herself In This One, the female archetype of "the princess" is transformed in a "modern, feminist, empowered way" in a story of child abuse and survival? source
User:GiantSnowman, User:Gerda Arendt, Mifter Public, I'm working on this a bit to try and get it in shape for the front page. I've proposed an alternate hook and am making copyedits. Please bear with me; I obviously have a bit more work to do and appreciate y'all's comments here and whatever you can do in the article. GS, I will ping you again when I think the article is more ready than it is now. (I'll add that I didn't see the entirety of the article when the DYK nomination was made, and I would have held back on it, but it is what it is, and I'm sure we can make it work.) Thanks again, Dr Aaij (talk) 15:42, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Not a review but it might be quite fun just to just go with: ... that The Princess Saves Herself In This One?- Dumelow (talk) 19:36, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I honestly kind of like that one. It's short and eye catching. What say you, Dr Aaij? Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:45, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 11[edit]

Nationalization in Poland

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 06:04, 14 December 2018 (UTC).

  • FYI, the main hook is also boring, as in "utterly unsurprising". Daniel Case (talk) 05:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Piotrus: One issue here is that the article itself feels incomplete. It states that nationalization in Poland has led to controversies, but doesn't actually go into detail as to what these were. This is a major red flag and by itself makes the article unsuitable for DYK in its current state. Perhaps once this is done we'll have more possible hook suggestions? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:54, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
    • While the````re is scope for expansion, I do believe the article meets DYK requirements. DYKs do not have to be comprehensive in all aspects. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:48, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
      • Yes the DYK rules do not require incomplete articles, merely that unfinished articles are discouraged (to be fair, the line between the two can be blurry). However, I am quoting from the supplementary guidelines: Articles that fail to deal adequately with the topic are also likely to be rejected. For example, an article about a book that fails to summarize the book's contents, but contains only a bio of the author and some critics' views, is likely to be rejected as insufficiently comprehensive. (emphasis mine). It does not need to be a blow-by-blow account on what these controversies are, but at the very least, a brief summary would be nice. If you will be unable to address this issue, and taking to account that neither proposed hook thus far is of interest to a broad audience and there doesn't seem to be anything else in the article that's "hooky", I am afraid I may have to mark this for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:12, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
        • Look, I've written 1000+ DYKs. I know very well what is sufficient for a DYK, and this article is. You find it boring? Tough. Someone else will pass it because it meets the DYK criteria, and there are no grounds for disqualifying it. To be clear: the 'controversies' section is a related topic but not the main topic. One day I may write a dedicated article about it (pl wiki has one already and I've added a link, plus a bit more content). As far as nationalization itself, even without the controversies section, this is an adequate summary and thus DYKable. So may I kindly ask you to stop making trouble invoking a weird 'I don't like it' interpretation that I've never heard from anyone in my ~10 years of DYKing? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Based on the above comments: i.e. the refusal of the nominator to expand on an incomplete article, coupled with two hooks that are now rejected, I am now marking this for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
    • I disagree with your closure. I ask for another review and I ask that you never review any of my DYKs since you use some strange interpretations. Please keep your disruptive activities away from my contributions. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:03, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
I fail to understand what is wrong with my request. I'm not trying to derail the nomination; on the contrary, when I mentioned the request for expansion, I was trying to help. It was you who brought up that the hook suggestions were potentially boring, and I was not even the first to mention that this is indeed the case, it was Daniel Case. Secondly, my main request was simply a request to expand the last section of the article, specifically the part which goes but some of its rulings have led to further controversies and several trials. That part ended very abruptly, with no mention of exactly what these controversies are. It didn't even need to be its own section, paragraph, or article: a single sentence could have done the job. I was simply requesting that additional information about these controversies be added to the article, and honestly I'm surprised at the reaction I've gotten in this nomination. I was hoping that perhaps if some more information could be added to the article, then new possible hook suggestions could be proposed, since the ones that have been formulated thus far aren't very good. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Fair enough, I might have overreacted a little, through I still think the article is meets DYK criteria. Some topics do not lend themselves to great hooks, and it is not like your or anyone else has proposed a better one. The reprivatisation section is a side of the main topic here, and I don't think the hook should focus on it since it is a separate and independently notable issue that is only partially related to the topic in question, i.e. nationalization in Poland. I have already added a few sentences to the article, including to that section. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 19:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I have been requested to offer a reading on this article, and in fairness I am Piotrus's friend. The argument that the material or introduction is "boring" is a silly one which should be rejected outright; Wikipedia is not YouTube or an entertainment site, and article introductions should provide succinct summaries or definitions; it is Taylor Swift songs that require "hooks," not a reference or encyclopedic tool. I do agree that this article could use more content and specifics. My advice, and it is only my advice, is that the article remain DYK provisionally for now with the understanding that it will be improved with expansion, and any decision on it be delayed until Piotrus or the community can revise. Keneckert (talk) 03:18, 8 January 2019 (UTC) Dr. Ken Eckert
@Keneckert: I think that when you headline a section on the Main Page "Did you know ..." the reader is set up to expect a surprising or interesting fact that would make them want to click the link. Articles themselves, I agree, do not require hooks; they are what they are and sometimes no amount of research will produce something that might elicit a raised eyebrow from a reader.
However, DYK is a different story, WP:DYKHOOK, part of the DYK rules section, explicitly asks nominators "When you write the hook, please make it 'hooky', that is, short, punchy, catchy, and likely to draw the readers in to wanting to read the article." It should be beyond argument that a hook stating that a lot of problems have resulted from reprivatizing previously nationalized assets is not likely to accomplish the latter; indeed, it would be noteworthy if those problems hadn't occurred. Piotrus clearly understands this in his nomination when he admits that 1A is boring. We also pretty much lampshaded this a while back ourselves with the hook "... that The Rolling Stones are a British rock band? Okay, you probably did ..." (But that one will only work once, and that was a rather extraordinary subject). Daniel Case (talk) 07:44, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 13[edit]

Webbed foot

Platypus foot
Platypus foot

Created by Yeptune (talk). Nominated by Kaldari (talk) at 19:42, 13 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article good, but the hook is boring. How about...
  • ALT1: ... that some waterfowl use their webbed feet as an aid in elaborate mating displays?
Kingsif (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
@Kingsif: That sounds great to me! Kaldari (talk) 22:50, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Great! Kingsif (talk) 22:54, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg @Kingsif: Per Rule H2, you cannot approve your own hook. Could another reviewer take a look at this? Yoninah (talk) 22:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
  • As there's no clear evidence that a full review has been done (saying "article good" is not a full review), I've conducted one
  • ☑Y Article is long enough (10994 chars), new enough (moved to mainspace 11 December, nominated on 13 December), and article is within policy. Sourcing looks good, AGF as most of them are offline
  • ☒N The hook is short enough and interesting, but is not mentioned with a source in the article anywhere. Please add to the article with an appropriate source
  • ☒N QPQ not done. The nominator, Kaldari has 5 previous DYK credits, and so is required to review another article for QPQ. As "Review requirement (QPQ) – For every nomination you make you must review one other nomination (unrelated to you)‍—‌this is called quid pro quo or QPQ... Exception: If, at the time a nomination is promoted to the main page, its nominator has fewer than five DYK credits (whether or not self-nominated) then the nomination is exempt from QPQ." This is no the case here
  • Symbol question.svg Overall, a nice article but hook needs to be in the article, and a QPQ is required by Kaldari. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:26, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Joseph2302: Thanks for reviewing, though some comments: I’m pretty sure this is Kaldari's fifth nom, not requiring QPQ (it’s less than and including 5, if I remember correctly/my reading is correct). Isn’t the source for the statement in the article at the end of the next sentence? Kingsif (talk) 10:38, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • In the Other behaviors section, it only mentions ducks using it more courtship, not "some waterfowl". If it's just ducks, we should put sucks into the hook instead of waterfowl. And no, they have 5 previous nominations, and so this is their sixth, so they need to do a QPQ. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:56, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Joseph2302: I'm fine with changing it to ducks. I'll try to do the review soon. I only have limited (cell phone) internet access for the next few days, though, so I might be a little slow. Kaldari (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

S. Dharmambal

Created by Gfosankar (talk). Self-nominated at 14:40, 16 December 2018 (UTC).

General eligiblity:

  • New Enough: Green tickY
  • Long Enough: Red XN - meets length criteria, but has not be evaluated for quality and might be a stub (more likely start)

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - Three issues:
  1. I would want to insert the word "is" before honored: "...that Indian activist S. Dharmambal is honoured as heroic Tamil mother for her contributions to Tamil language?"
  2. Although the statement itself is sufficiently-cited, the article does not make clear what her contributions to the Tamil language are. I infer from the article that what is meant by her "contributions to the language" is that she was a proponent of Tamil-language education. I think that both the article and the DYK nomination would be stronger if that is spelled out more clearly, perhaps in the lead paragraph of the article.
  3. Only the first initial is given. Do we know her name?
  • Summary: The hook itself is very interesting and I would strongly support the nomination if the connection between her work and its summary were a bit clearer.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Kenirwin/(talk) 20:36, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

  • Do we need to wait for quality assessment? I don't think so.
  • Other issues
  1. ALT 1:... that Indian activist S. Dharmambal is honoured as heroic Tamil mother for her contributions to Tamil language?
  2. clarified in the article.
  3. clarified in the article's Talk page.
Thank you for the review. Gfosankar (talk) 14:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to see whether issues have been addressed; it's been a month. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:43, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Rhythm Inside (Loïc Nottet song)

Improved to Good Article status by Cartoon network freak (talk). Self-nominated at 14:37, 15 October 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Starting review: is indeed GA status and nominated in time. Article is big enough and cited throughout. Correct person credited. Hook is 178 characters, and links to the article. However the reference supplied does not confirm the hook, as it fails to mention much of its detail. QPQ does not appear to be done and this is the 10th nomination for User:Cartoon network freak. Also no copyright problem found. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:55, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
  • What you added is a primary source, so the hook can be considered sourced. But I am still awaiting a review of another did you know nomination. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:50, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Graeme Bartlett, as the user appears to have less than 5 DYK nominations, they are exempt from the QPQ requirement. Best, Mifter (talk) 00:14, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  1. Template:Did you know nominations/Inna
  2. Template:Did you know nominations/Give Me Your Everything
  3. Template:Did you know nominations/Heaven (Inna song)
  4. Template:Did you know nominations/Alexandra Stan v. Marcel Prodan
  5. Template:Did you know nominations/Homophobia (film)
  6. Template:Did you know nominations/No Sleepin'
  7. Template:Did you know nominations/Goodbye (The Humans song)
  8. Template:Did you know nominations/List of certified albums in Romania
  9. Template:Did you know nominations/List of Airplay 100 number ones of the 2010s
These are 9 prior nominations, but most were unsuccessful. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:12, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
To my understanding, we count credits, not nominations. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:36, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Graeme Bartlett, Gerda Arendt is correct. The measurement is number of DYK credits, not DYK nominations, so it's however many make the front page. In this case, I only see two, based on Cartoon network freak's talk page, so no QPQ is required at the present time. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:42, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg @Graeme Bartlett: @Cartoon network freak: apologies, but I've had to pull this one at the last minute due to a concern raised at WP:ERRORS by Kevin McE. See here: [4] Once the issues are sorted out it can be re-promoted. THanks.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
This is not going to change any more for this hook as it was referenced by the primary source. If hook pullers are not satisfied then I will not revert the pull, and they will still not be satisfied. I was happy that the hook was true and supported by the video. So this hook can be incinerated. If someone wants to propose another hook, ten I will reassess that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:50, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
@Graeme Bartlett: what about '"...that in a music video for Belgian singer Loïc Nottet's "Rhythm Inside" (2015), several people arrive at a warehouse in a container for human experimentation? (https://wiwibloggs.com/2015/10/13/belgium-loic-nottet-goes-sci-fi-in-new-rhythm-inside-video/104469/)(https://www.nrj.be/articles/rhythm-inside-nouveau-clip.html)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cartoon network freak (talkcontribs) 05:35, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: When this was pulled, the nomination was added under December 13 at some point. SL93 (talk) 11:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 14[edit]

Cinema of Venezuela

A frame from the film
A frame from the film
  • ... that the first Venezuelan film was an 1897 short (frame pictured) showing a dentist pulling teeth? Source: "we know thanks to documental research that the name of these first films were Un célebre especialista sacando muelas en el gran Hotel Europa" (The Beginnings of Cinema in Venezuela)
    • ALT1:... that the public response to the introduction of cinema to Venezuela was "cold" and "indifferent"? Source: "Unlike what could have been expected, the recetion given to cinema could be said to have been cold and characterized by a kind of indifferent curiosity" (The Beginnings of Cinema in Venezuela)

5x expanded by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 02:29, 17 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The full review will be to follow, but for now I believe the article might need some copyediting due to improper capitalizations in certain places (for example "first Cinematography Law"). In addition, several statements such as "Equally famous is the 1977 film El Pez que Fuma (Román Chalbaud).", "The 2013 horror film La Casa del Fin de los Tiempos became such a success that its director was hired in 2016 to shoot an American remake." lack citations. Of the two hooks, the first hook is probably the best option, but I'd rather it not go with the image since it's rather dark and doesn't actually depict the dentist pulling teeth (if an image of that could be found, then that might work better). I understand that some editors are not exactly fond of "first" hooks, so I will not object if ALT1 or another hook is promoted in its stead. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:20, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: The issues brought up in the above comment have been handled; not improper capitalisation, since its a proper noun (the name of the Cinematography Law wasn't very inventive), and citations have been added. Problem with the image is that it's the only surviving part of the film, as far as anyone knows. I don't mind which hook is used, or if there's others. If I can find the ref for it, perhaps say that the film industry in Venezuela routinely makes a loss? Kingsif (talk) 02:41, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Sure, that sounds like an interesting factoid. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:47, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
  • ALT2 ... that the Venezuelan film industry regularly makes a national loss, due to lack of interest and general financial mismanagement?
  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article does appear to meet the 5x expansion requirement, which was met before nomination. For the most part the article is sourced; Spanish-language references are accepted in good faith. Of the hooks proposed, the original hook and ALT 2 are the only ones to be approved; the hook to be promoted will be left to the promoter. Both are cited inline, interesting, and verified. Earwigs has a relatively high score and detects some possible close paraphrasing with this source. In addition, the article still needs a full copyedit, as there are still typos and improperly-parsed symbols (for example: "we can point to specific"). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
    • Thanks, I will take a look over sources and the funny symbols... next year Kingsif (talk) 17:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
      • @Narutolovehinata5: I've looked at the copyvio report, it shows that the overlap is mostly film names, with three quotations. It's rather unavoidable to not mention the same film names, unfortunately. I think I've removed all the funny symbols - looking at where they were, it'll be a funny accent key when I was editing that section. Kingsif (talk) 13:20, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Noted. I'd still recommend a full copy edit to make the article flow better. I'd also suggest either linking to Bolivares or giving an approximate exchange rate at the time of the publication of the source (obviously not the current exchange rate). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:27, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 15[edit]

BGR-34

  • Reviewed: Rejected 2, worked on 1 and accepted 1. Can't be bothered to look for diffs.
  • Comment:

Created by Winged Blades of Godric (talk). Self-nominated at 16:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg It'd be nice if the direct quotations used here were in the article. Anarchyte (talk | work) 10:26, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg This interesting article is new enough and long enough. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright / close paraphrasing issues. I don't like the proposed hook, the second half of which seems ungrammatical (you can't really describe a drug as "a propoganda"). Could you suggest something else? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
    Cwmhiraeth, thanks:-) Will think of one, shortly. WBGconverse 05:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Manuel Trujillo Durán

Manuel Trujillo Durán
Manuel Trujillo Durán
  • ... that for nearly 100 years people thought Manuel Trujillo Durán (pictured) introduced cinema to Venezuela, though he was just a film technician at the time? Source: "Manuel Trujillo Durán, who was until very recently thought to be the person who had brought the Vitascope to Venezuela, was actually a photographer hired by Méndez to operate the Vitascope" The Beginnings of Cinema in Venezuela
    • ALT1:... that Manuel Trujillo Durán (pictured) started university aged 14, ironically at the Federal College of Men? Source: "Manuel Trujillo Durán inició sus estudios de bachillerato a los 14 años en el Colegio Federal de Varones" "[Trujillo] began his bachelor studies at 14 years in the Federal College of Men" (Consejo Legislativo del Zulia)

Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 19:50, 15 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The full review will be to follow, but I don't think ALT1 is acceptable as I don't really see what's "ironic" about it. As for ALT0, it possibly works but it might need to be rephrased somewhat as I find the wording to be a little awkward. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:21, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I guess the irony is that a boy was accepted into a college of men. SpinningSpark 22:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Not very clear either way, "men" is a general term and includes "boys". If this will push through, ALT0 is probably the best option. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:54, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 17[edit]

Slater family (EastEnders)

  • Reviewed: El Pez que Fuma
  • Comment: Feel free to edit the hooks or suggest an alternative.

Moved to mainspace by Soaper1234 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:38, 17 December 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 18[edit]

Isaac Maliyamungu

  • ... that a former mayor was "cut into pieces in [a] market in full public view" by Isaac Maliyamungu in 1972? Source: "There were many others reportedly killed during this period, among them: [...] and Francis Walugembe, the former Mayor of Masaka. Several prominent Ugandans living in exile write that several hours after his arrest 'Walugembe was cut into pieces in the market in full public view by Lt.-Col. Maliyamungu. This murder, which was one of the most brutal, was witnessed by people we know'" (From Racism to Genocide: Extracts from Report of the International Commission of Jurists (JSTOR 2934888), p. 18)

Created by Applodion (talk). Self-nominated at 19:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Comment Are you sure he is dead? That hook won't do if he's alive. Johnbod (talk) 22:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Death confirmed He died in the Sudan in 1984—reportedly from poisoning. See this source. -Indy beetle (talk) 05:50, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Caroline Katzenstein

Portrait of Caroline Katzenstein
Portrait of Caroline Katzenstein
  • ... that Caroline Katzenstein fought for women's right to vote alongside Alice Paul and wrote to politicians like John F. Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, and Harry Truman to gain support for the Equal Rights Amendment - which is still not ratified today? Source BBC
  • Reviewed: I still have to review another nomination and will post this here once it's done - unless I am exempt because of less than 5 DYK credits.

Created by Gardneca (talk). Self-nominated at 00:50, 21 December 2018 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. - The image is licensed and a good illustration. Why portrait in the caption? Better a year? - You seem new, good news: you are exempt from qpq. Hook: this is way too long, too many thoughts. Mention one person she addressed, not four, and link the person, and link the amendments, and link Paul if you think people know her, otherwise don't mention her. - Article: some things you will have to to fix:
  • Please no "bare urls", - give us publisher and a date (or accessdate), better also an author.
  • Have a reference at the end of each section. - Let me know if you don't know how to use a ref multiple times.
Other things are optional but I recommend them highly:
  • Link the people as in the hook.
  • Consider fewer red links, - they are a bit distracting, the longer the more so, - keep only what you expect to grow to an article soon.
  • Consoider to have no extra death section if it's only that one sentence.
  • Avoid words such as "famous", and "however".
  • "Suffrage special" - do we have an article we could link to? The many names don't add much to her bio, think about trimming boring lists.
  • Consider an infobox. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:16, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Gardneca, please respond. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt, sorry I'm here! I am new and a bit overwhelmed. I made the changes you suggested in the article, but I left the red links because I'd like to keep working on this. Also, I couldn't find the bare url you mentioned. Lastly, not sure what an info box is. I will fix the DYK hook, but do I edit it directly above, or do I add a new one? Thanks --Gardneca —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
That's all fine, take your time. I'll get back later, busy day today, just let you know that I am with you. - An infobox appears in the upper right of an article, with basic facts such as born when and where, etc. Compare Werner Bardenhewer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Gardneca, now looking. The bare urls in the external links section were fixed in this edit. The hook: please don't edit it (unless minor spelling mistakes), but word something new below where put "ALT1" for you. Make ALT2 or whatever if you want to suggest alternatives. Looking forward to your reply! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
ALT1: ... ?

Radu Lupu

Lupu in 1975
Lupu in 1975
  • ... that the Romanian pianist Radu Lupu has performed with every major orchestra in the world? Source: several, including "Radu Lupu: Acclaim in Spite of Himself" (Clavier, 1981)
    • ALT1:... that the Romanian pianist Radu Lupu's public debut at the age of 12 featured his own compositions? Source: several, including "Wonderboy" (The Christian Science Monitor, 1970)

5x expanded by Zingarese (talk). Self-nominated at 21:01, 18 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I'm claiming this for review, but I'll hold off until the "Under Construction" templates are gone. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:33, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 20[edit]

Gustavus Myers Center for the Study of Bigotry and Human Rights

Created by Wasted Time R (talk). Self-nominated at 21:49, 20 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new enough and long enough. I didn't find any plagiarism, and the only hits I found were repeats of the names of subjects. QPQ has been done, and the hook facts are verified in their respective sources. Unfortunately, I don't find any of the three hooks to be that interesting to a broad audience; ALT0 and ALT1 are not exactly unusual, and to be honest, neither is ALT2. It's really common for groups to be better known for their awards than their actual work (this is especially the case in entertainment, like say the Academy Awards). Is there something else that could be suggested here? The only thing I could think of based on the article is how it was unclear who their members or funders were, although I'm not sure if that's a common practice among non-profit organizations. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:37, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for the review. I agree, the hooks are not scintillating, and usually with DYK I do better in that regard. But I can't make a hook saying that it was unclear who the center's members or funders were, because it must have been clear to someone – the two directors, if no one else – it's that I haven't been able to track it down. If this were a newspaper I would try contacting the first director, who is still alive, to see what the deal was and fill in a few gaps. But if I do that here, I'll just get bludgeoned with complaints about OR. So as it stands, I think ALT2 is about the best that can be gone with. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:00, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Another suggestion is to ditch ALT2, but write another hook that revolves around the award and explaining how the award was considered a big deal when it was still around. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:04, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
That would get more into the territory of Gustavus Myers Outstanding Book Award, another article I created. But I decided not to nominate that one for DYK, because I never made a list of all the winners (a lot of effort, and I didn't think I could source most of the ones from earlier years), nor did I come up with a complete list of winning authors who have WP articles (the existing list of those is mostly taken from the Gustavus Myers, from which I split some material out). Wasted Time R (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm afraid that's the only way forward I can see right now. There isn't anything else that seems hook-worthy in the article, so if you don't think that could be an option, this nomination may have to be marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
I've found and added something to the article, which provides:
If nothing else those two words will attract some attention. Wasted Time R (talk) 02:42, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 24[edit]

Cartography of Jerusalem

The Den Haag map of Crusader Jerusalem
The Den Haag map of Crusader Jerusalem
  • ... that most pre-modern historical maps of Jerusalem were made by Europeans? Source: Rubin, 2008, pages 125, 130, 136: "It is important, too, to note that these maps of the Holy City were made by Christians for a European Christian audience, at a time when Jerusalem was in the hands of the Muslims [Footnote: Indeed, there is a rather different genre of images of Jerusalem that was common among the [Christian] Orthodox, and only a few Jewish and Muslim graphic images are known from that period]... most of the early printed maps were made by Christians for a Christian audience, and they strived to create and promote a Christian image of the Holy City, even though it was under Muslim rule... The maps aimed at creating the image of an eternal Christian city as an alternative to the reality of a poor Oriental town."

Created by Onceinawhile (talk). Self-nominated at 22:41, 24 December 2018 (UTC).

  • Drive-by comment: Isn't this hook fact well known? Perhaps it would be hookier to add more of the details from the source, that "these maps of the Holy City were made by Christians for a European Christian audience, at a time when Jerusalem was in the hands of the Muslims". Yoninah (talk) 15:31, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Yoninah, it may well be, but wasn’t to me. I'm not convinced by the “in the hands of Muslims” reference, because the point is relevant even before the advent of Islam. Another source says:
Levy-Rubin & Rubin 1996, p. 352: "Although Jerusalem was indeed holy to Jews and Muslims as well as to Christians, there are almost no such depictions of the city that were drawn by either of the first two groups; it seems that generally this was a Christian genre."
Maybe a hook derived from this is more interesting?
Onceinawhile (talk) 19:12, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Onceinawhile: yes. I just thought that "Christians" or "European Christians" should be mentioned, rather than just Europeans. Yoninah (talk) 19:15, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
@Yoninah: how about the below? I left out "European" because Madaba was not European and the Crusader ones are debatable.
  • ALT1... that almost all pre-modern historical maps of Jerusalem were made by Chistians? Source: Levy-Rubin & Rubin 1996, p. 352: "Although Jerusalem was indeed holy to Jews and Muslims as well as to Christians, there are almost no such depictions of the city that were drawn by either of the first two groups; it seems that generally this was a Christian genre."
Onceinawhile (talk) 16:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Let's start a review. New enough, long enough, well referenced. But while the article exceeds 1500 characters, it definitely feels start-class. You start the History section with one paragraph, and then end the article. The section on List of maps of Jerusalem is empty. There are no images for what is obviously an illustrative subject. The image on this nomination is not in the article. Do you plan to expand this article more? Regarding the hook, I would prefer to see the whole quote mentioned in the article and hook:
  • ALT1a ... that almost all pre-modern historical maps of Jerusalem were made by Christians for a Christian audience?
  • QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Yoninah: thank you. I am happy with your ALT1a. As to the article, those are all excellent points, and consistent with my intentions. I have built the article further today and will continue to do so. I will ping you again when I am done. Onceinawhile (talk) 12:48, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Yoninah: this is all done. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 25[edit]

Walt Torrence

Walt Torrence
Walt Torrence
  • ... that Walt Torrence (pictured) was an All-American college basketball player for UCLA before joining the US Army and winning a gold medal at the Pan American Games? Source: "A third-team was comprised of Walt Torrence of UCLA ..." (Leader-Times), "Torrence competed in the military Olympics in Germany in 1962 and represented the Army in the Pan-American games in Sao Paulo, Brazil, in 1963" (Kansas City Times), "Winning six games by an average margin of almost 30 points, the USA successfully defended its championship, captured the gold medal, and extended its Pan American Games winning streak to 15 consecutive games." (USA Basketball)
  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Bagumba (talk). Self-nominated at 13:51, 1 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article is new (and nominated just in the nick of time) and long enough. It is in good condition overall, with citations for the entire body. The hook formatting and image both check out okay, and the hook appears interesting enough. Ref 17 supports the All-American part of the hook, ref 24 supports him being in the Army, and ref 27 supports him being on the gold medal-winning team. Spot-checks of refs 3, 11, 18, 19, and 26 showed no concerns. I can detect two issues overall. First, a simple grammar fix is needed in College career: the sentence "with averages 15.3 points and 8.5 rebounds" needs "of" after "averages". It's minor, but let's get it cleaned up to avoid complaints later on; that was the only such bug I saw. Second, a QPQ review must be done, as you appear to be aware. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:24, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Cemile Timur

Source: "Cemile was 18 when she founded the team in April 2008.", "She is also the oldest player of the team" [5], "Antrenör Cemile Timur, ..." (in Turkish) [6], "... Kadınlar 1. Futbol Ligi’ne yükselen Hakkarigücü Spor ..." (in Turkish) [7]

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 12:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Just a drive-by-comment: I haven't looked at the article in detail but I think the hook is a bit confusing and hard to follow. Perhaps you could rewrite the hook so that it presented in a clearer and more concise way? I'll try to see if I can think of some ideas. Thanks, --SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Here is another similar hook I can think of:
  • OK. I agree. Thanks. CeeGee 04:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Requesting a new reviewer to see if ALT1 will work. Because I was the one who proposed ALT1 and I have some doubts of its interestingness, I don't want to approve this myself, but I'd be happy to continue to participate in this discussion. I also might try to think of some more hooks.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I found it interesting that you find your own hook not interesting. CeeGee 10:28, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @CeeGee: Well, the primary reason I proposed a new hook was to make it flow better than the original while keeping the overall topic the same. I'm not completely sure it's not interesting enough, but that I would rather have someone else decide. I will try to think of more hooks. I do wish we could somehow incorporate that she's played with the club into the hook, but I can't think of the way to do so while still making it flow well.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 13:43, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 26[edit]

Poovulagin Nanbargal

5x expanded by Gfosankar (talk). Self-nominated at 14:33, 28 December 2018 (UTC).

  • At first glance, the article appears to have quite a few grammatical errors, some of which make sentences unclear. I'll do a more thorough search in a second and point out specific issues.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:43, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I've done some copy-editing, but there are some issues left that I haven't been able to fix. Specifically, the following issues will likely need to be addressed before this is eligible for DYK:
  • None of the sources in the History section seem to mention Nedunchezhiyan's age when he died or his birth date
  • "During this legal battle, many activists and writers in Tamil Nadu joined the organisation" isn't sourced
  • I'm a bit confused about the relationship to the People's Movement Against Nuclear Energy; the article says that the PMANE protested against the nuclear plant and was given legal support, but what does this have to do with Poovulagin Nanbargal and why would it cause activists and writers to join the Poovulagin Nanbargal?
  • Are you sure that this source says that the organisation publishes poems about ecology and the Green Revolution in India? To me it doesn't seem like it, but I'm not certain as I don't speak the language.
  • The last sentence in the section Publication is grammatically incorrect. I assume you mean that the company currently publishes the two magazines? I wanted to check in with you before correcting it.
  • Source 8 is the only source placed after the claim against the government's decision on projects such as the Kaveri delta coal-bed methane project, but it doesn't seem to support the fact.
  • The article is interesting overall, and certainly notable, so your creation and expansion of it is greatly appreciated. Face-smile.svg However, I can't approve this until these issues are addressed. Thanks!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  1. I added a source.
  2. I removed the unsourced sentence. The sentence what I tried to wrote like - after it filled the case only the mass media talked about the organisation and it reached general public in the state, at that time more people joined the organisation including writers and activists. I am unable to get better source, I have only blogs to support the sentence. I will add again if I get reliable source.
  3. PMANE protested against the plant and Poovulagin Nanbargal gave legal support to PMANE. As mentioned above, organisation expanded after the legal case, previously it was known as a publisher to small group of people.
  4. Yes, Tamil source mentioned the same and I added a English source. They have so far published 25 titles on issues such as the dangers of plastic, and the effects of Green Revolution on our soil, among others.
  5. I corrected the sentence. Please check it.
  6. I rewrote the sentence.
  • Thanks for the review. Gfosankar (talk) 06:22, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the modifications. I made some more copy-edits to the article and will now be doing a more thorough look to see if this is DYK-ready.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 15:14, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but I'm still a bit confused. Even if it's a series of projects, it doesn't cover every methane gas and hydrocarbon project there is and the source doesn't mention that series of projects in specific. It could also be that I'm just being oblivious to something obvious. :)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 23:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • I removed that source and added new one to specify. Gfosankar (talk) 03:39, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Sue Miller (cancer activist)

  • ... that after a mastectomy ended her professional modeling career, Sue Miller assembled a fashion show featuring only women who had had mastectomies? Source: "[I] decided I would do it but only if I could use models who had breast cancer" (Westword), "Sue started arranging and participating in fashion shows that featured women who had undergone mastectomies as models." (Intermountain Jewish News)

Created by Yoninah (talk). Self-nominated at 00:52, 26 December 2018 (UTC).

  • So in the article the source used for the hook and a lot of other citations is not right, the link and the title do not match - probably a copy and paste error since you have the right article here. MPJ-DK (talk) 03:40, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @MPJ-DK: I'm sorry, I don't understand what you're talking about. Yoninah (talk) 13:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh, you mean the Westword source? Not sure why that happened. I corrected the link in the article. Yoninah (talk) 21:44, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

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

Overall: Symbol question.svg The 25% copyright violation rating is for quotes and common facts that are hard to reword, no issues in that MPJ-DK (talk) 03:47, 26 December 2018 (UTC) Note: The article uses the word "prothesis" which links to a disambiguation page and none of the definitions listed seem to fit the context here. I will not do the source review until you've made the link correction etc. MPJ-DK (talk) 03:47, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@MPJ-DK: I'm pretty sure the intended word was prosthesis; I've fixed the spelling/link. 97198 (talk) 06:59, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I'm afraid I will have to recuse myself from the remainder of this review. Someone else please pick it up and complete it. MPJ-DK (talk) 23:29, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 27[edit]

XIX Army Corps

  • Reviewed: NA, this is my 3rd DYK
  • Comment: Hook drafted by Ted52

Created by Ted52 (talk). Nominated by DannyS712 (talk) at 18:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - I'm probably just blind, but I don't see where the article explicitly supports the material in the DYK hook and cites a source supporting it
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I find the article very interesting and comprehensive; I can tell the creator worked very hard on it and that is much appreciated! However, I'm afraid this will require work before it can be eligible. I'd suggest first making sure all material is supported by a reliable sources and then requesting a copy-edit. I haven't fully reviewed for neutrality yet but will soon. Best of wishes, SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:13, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ted52: can you take a look at this? I'm not any where to as knowledgeable about this page as you are... --DannyS712 (talk) 04:36, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712: All material can be supported by sources, but I was of the impression that citing the same page over and over again is just bad style. I could go through the work of citing every paragraph? Ted52 (talk) 14:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Hey Ted52. Since you're using an inline citation style, then the general rule is that there should be a cite for at least every paragraph, and if a paragraph has material from multiple citations you may sometimes want to distribute multiple refs within that paragraph. Using a cite multiple times it's not a problem; it's certainly better than having unsourced material. The following sections in particular need to be sourced better:
  • Wizna and Brest-Litovsk (6–16 September 1939)
  • The "German-Soviet Parade" and the Conclusion of the Campaign (17 September - 6 October 1939)
  • Preparations
  • Attack towards the Meuse (10–13 May 1940)
  • In the Somme Basin (17–20 May 1940)
  • Towards Dunkirk (21–29 May 1940)
  • Panzergruppe Guderian and southern Redeployment (28 May - 9 June 1940)
  • Southern Offensive (10–22 June 1940)
  • Panzergruppe 2
  • XIX Mountain Army Corps
It's an interesting read, and again, I can tell you worked hard on it. Let me know if you have any questions.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Template:Reply to:SkyGazer 512Very well, will do. Is there a way I can template one reference and use it for the next? Reentering the same book's info over and over again is cumbersome, but I also don't want to do the thing where it's like "p. 100 - 200", because that's silly. I would like to preferably use the same reference over and over again for like 60% of the passages you inquire about, but with a slightly different page notation each time. The reason why most of the paragraphs aren't cited is exactly that 'cumbersome' functionality of having to build the reference from scratch everytime. Ted52 (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ted52: Well, I suppose you could convert to using {{sfn}} refs. Basically how that works is you have two reference sections; one of them has a list of sources and the other usually just contains {{reflist}}. For the list of sources section, you include |ref=harv at the end of each citation template. Then, whenever you want to use a reference in the article, use the coding {{sfn|Author's last name|Year the author wrote it|pp=Page number range (or p=single page number)}}, and make sure that in the list of sources section each ref has a last= parameter and either a year= or date= parameter. If you do everything correctly, when you click on a sfn ref used in the article, it will be abbreviated and take you to the ref section with the reflist; then if you click on the highlighted ref there, it will take you to that ref's entry in the list of full sources, which only need to be listed once. It sounds confusing, yes, but once you get used to it it's not as bad as it seems. The documentation page for the template gives a lot more details. I can give you some examples if you'd like and I could help you convert the refs for this one. It's often a good idea to use it when there are book citations which you use a large number of pages from. Another technique sometimes used is having sfn for some sources and the other "main" ref style for others, such as using sfn for only books.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:40, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
An example of a page using sfn for only the book refs is Chinese alligator (e.g., the abbreviated Reading & Miller 2000, p. 72. in the reflist which links to the full ref in the sources subsection: Reading, Richard P.; Miller, Brian (2000). Endangered Animals: A Reference Guide to Conflicting Issues (illustrated ed.). Greenwood Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0313308161. Retrieved December 9, 2018.). Molly Morgan is an example of a page which uses sfn for all references except one. If you have any further questions, please let me know; this can seem quite confusing. I highly recommend that you read the documentation page for the sfn template if you might want to use this style.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:44, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
(btw, Ted52, the correct coding for a ping is {{reply to|USERNAME HERE}}, not {{reply to:USERNAME HERE}} :-)--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 16:47, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────G'day all, I just noticed this on the Milhist alert list. I thought I'd give you a heads-up that Guderian was the commanding general of this formation at the time, and we need to be careful about accepting what he says as gospel, given he is probably too close to the subject. It would be much better if this hook was cited to a reliable source that was independent of the subject. As a general observation, the article relies far too heavily on Guderian's writings, needs more independent reliable sources, and we need to be wary of the clean Wehrmacht trope associated with many Wehrmacht generals trying to whitewash their activities during the war. Also, the article should be at XIX Army Corps (Wehrmacht) IAW pre-emptive disambiguation arrangements for military formations per WP:MILMOS#UNITNAME. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 29[edit]

Geoff Harvey

Geoff Harvey
Geoff Harvey

Created by Ianblair23 (talk). Self-nominated at 03:40, 29 December 2018 (UTC).

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg Great hook, I really wanted to read more DannyS712 (talk) 04:33, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from prep. The hook is all right, but the article has a lot of close paraphrasing from the trove.nla.gov source. See Earwig's. Please rewrite and reorganize these sentences in your own words. Yoninah (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

 Note: that source is cited no less that 8 times, and none of the close paraphrasing is passed off as the contributor's own ideas. Just saying --DannyS712 (talk) 23:57, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi Yoninah and DannyS712, I have addressed this issue. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for taking care of the close paraphrasing, Ianblair23. To be honest, the more I look at this hook, the more trivial it sounds. People outside Australia will have no idea what he looks like, beard or not, especially if we put this in a non-image slot (which I was planning). He was at Nine Network for nearly four decades; is this the best we can say about him? Yoninah (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Well Yoninah, we could change it to ALT1 ... that the former musical director for the Nine Network, Geoff Harvey composed the theme songs for The Sullivans, A Current Affair, Today and Sunday?
Or something a bit more quirky ALT2 ... that the former musical director for the Nine Network, Geoff Harvey composed the theme song for The Sullivans for his wife's cousin's wedding? (not yet added to article but sourced here)
Let me know what you think. Cheers – Ianblair23 (talk) 23:05, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi Yoninah, any furthers thoughts on the above? – Ianblair23 (talk) 04:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the reminder. But I won't be able to think about this until after Shabbat. Yoninah (talk) 12:26, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on December 30[edit]

Así Fue

Juan Gabriel
Juan Gabriel

Created by Magiciandude (talk). Self-nominated at 02:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on December 31[edit]

Leipziger Universitätschor

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 18:50, 6 January 2019 (UTC).

Death of Mohammad Habali

  • Reviewed: Coming soon!

Created by Mhhossein (talk). Self-nominated at 17:28, 3 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Mhhossein This hook is not neutral, it's clearly pushing a POV. Please suggest another hook. And a QPQ is also required. (Another user can do full review but I'm just mentioning the clear issues) Joseph2302 (talk) 19:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
@Joseph2302:Thanks for reviewing the hook. But can you say what kind of POV do you mean? Are you saying there's the possibility that, despite the wide comments on the footage by Israeli and non-Israeli sources, the area had been violent when the shooting was done? --Mhhossein talk 13:38, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 1[edit]

Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament, Gérard Bolduc, Paul Dumont

Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament in 2009
Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament in 2009

Created by Flibirigit (talk). Self-nominated at 03:37, 1 January 2019 (UTC).

Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament

Policy compliance:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg DannyS712 (talk) 06:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

  • Only plagiarism issues detected are quotes or the name of the book written, so not an issue (since the quotes are sourced).
  • Hook interest contingent upon being shown on February 20th, and assuming that the same thing is not in the "on this day" section
  • Event legacy section is pretty promotionally written - do we really need all 5 quotes? The notable participants section is okay.
Gérard Bolduc
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg DannyS712 (talk) 06:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

  • Hook interest contingent upon being shown on February 20th, and assuming that the same thing is not in the "on this day" section
Paul Dumont
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg DannyS712 (talk) 06:31, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

  • Hook interest contingent upon being shown on February 20th, and assuming that the same thing is not in the "on this day" section
Notes
  • All DYK templates marked as "maybe" to remove the error that shows up without a status, but I will say so when the status is determined for each.
  • the last 2 are marked as "minor" pending confirmation of French hook citation. The first one is now intentionally marked maybe, pending neutrality and hook citation. The hook's year (59 vs 60) needs to be cleared up.
  • All articles could use a copy edit, but they are in reasonably good shape prose-wise
Discussion
  • 60th anniversary vs 59 years ago? please explain --- --DannyS712 (talk) 06:49, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Limited request for a new reviewer: I don't know French. I'll AGF for the citations in the articles in French, but can another reviewer please check that the hook citations confirm the hook? --DannyS712 (talk) 06:53, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Flibirigit: please see notes about the 60 vs 59, as well as the neutrality of the first article. --DannyS712 (talk) 07:02, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Here is the first source in French:

Fonctionnaire au ministère de la Chasse et de la Pêche, M. Bolduc avec quelques amis : Paul Dumont, Jacques Boissinot, Edmond de la Bruère et Pat Timmons, fondent en 1960 le Tournoi international de hockey pee-wee de Québec. Cette idée lut est venue à la suite de la participation des clubs de Québec qu'il avait amenés dans des tournois à Goderich en Ontario et à Duluth au Minnesota.

Translation

Official at the Ministry of Hunting and Fishing, Mr. Bolduc with some friends: Paul Dumont, Jacques Boissinot, Edmond de la Bruere and Pat Timmons, founded in 1960 the International Pee Wee Hockey Tournament in Quebec. This idea came as a result of the participation of the Quebec clubs he had brought to tournaments in Goderich, Ontario and Duluth, Minnesota.

Here is the second source in French:

Ce samedi 20 février 1960, ça y est pourtant. Vingt-huit équipes sont inscrites à la première édition présentée à l’aréna du parc Victoria, l’un des trois seuls de la ville avec le Colisée et le pavillon de la Jeunesse. La violente tempête de neige de la veille, le Carnaval et la cérémonie d’ouverture des Jeux olympiques à Squaw Valley auraient pu jeter de l’ombre sur l’événement. Mais la promesse de verser des surplus aux œuvres du patronage Roc-Amadour allait rallier la presse, sceptique jusque-là. Dès le tout premier match, à 14 h, les joueurs des équipes des paroisses locales de Saint-Pascal et Saint-Joseph découvrirent alors un gisement de sympathie qui ne s’épuisera jamais. «Je m’en souviens comme si c’était hier et j’en parle à chaque année avec un «moton» dans la gorge à mes enfants et à mes frères. Quelles émotions nous avions vécues, nous les petits gars de la paroisse Saint-Pascal», témoigne Conrad Pitre, qui a aujourd’hui 61 ans. Le succès fut instantané. Plus de 700 personnes de Donnacona s’étant annoncées pour encourager leur équipe, Bolduc et les dirigeants durent conclure une entente avec la Ville pour «déménager» le tournoi au Colisée, en prévision de la journée des finales. Là aussi, l’audace allait être récompensée. Après les 12 500 spectateurs qui avaient envahi le petit aréna Victoria, durant les sept premières journées, 7 235 mordus occupèrent le Colisée pour l’ultime samedi.

Translation

This Saturday, February 20, 1960, it is there yet. Twenty-eight teams entered the first edition at the Victoria Park Arena, one of only three in the city with the Coliseum and the Youth Pavilion. The violent snow storm of the day before, the Carnival and the Opening Ceremony of the Olympic Games at Squaw Valley could have cast a shadow over the event. But the promise of paying surpluses to the Roc-Amadour patronage would win over the press, which had been skeptical until then. From the very first match, at 2 pm, players from the local parish teams of Saint-Pascal and Saint-Joseph then discovered a field of sympathy that will never be exhausted. "I remember it as if it were yesterday and I talk about it every year with a" moton "in the throat to my children and my brothers. What emotions we had lived, we the little guys of Saint-Pascal parish, "says Conrad Pitre, who is now 61 years old. The success was instantaneous. With more than 700 people from Donnacona having announced to cheer on their team, Bolduc and the leaders had to reach an agreement with the City to "move" the tournament to the Coliseum, in anticipation of the finals day. Here too, audacity would be rewarded. After the 12,500 spectators who had invaded the Victoria Arena, for the first seven days, 7,235 fans occupied the Coliseum for the final Saturday.

The second source from fr.canoe.ca appears to have gone offline, or maybe the URL archive has moved since it was first retrieved. I can probably find the original somewhere in my notes and post later. As for anniversaries, they are correct as listed. For example, the second event will be the 1st anniversary of the original event a year earlier. The third event will be the second anniversary of the original event two years earlier, and so on. To say that differently, the second occurrence of the event would occur when the event is one year old. Hence the anniversary is always one year less the age. As for the the analysis of the "Event Legacy" section being promotional, it includes testimonials of participants as to why the event is presitigious or memorable, et cetera. The inherent nature of any testimonial is somwhat promotional. I am open to other ideas on how to present the information. Flibirigit (talk) 13:41, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: I'll AGF for your translation. As for the testimonials, can we reduce the number that are listed? Or, if we have to list all 5, can we also include *some* criticism to make it more neutral overall? I'm just not comfortable with the section as it is now. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:22, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
In hindsight, I have struck ALT0, and changed it to ALT2 below. Sorry, I wasn't very awake this morning. Other hooks could also be made from the number of NHL players having played there, or the charitable donations raised. Flibirigit (talk) 22:00, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
ALT2: ...that the Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament (pictured) now in its 60th year, started on this day in 1960, cofounded by Gérard Bolduc and Paul Dumont?
DannyS712 I will think about how to rework the section, and get back to it in a couple days. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 20:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
I haven't forgotten about this. I should have something posted by the end of this week. Flibirigit (talk) 18:53, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
DannyS712, thank you for being patient while I was comtemplating how to rework the section. I decided to make it into a few paragraphs about the player experience, rather than being a list of testimonials. This is what I had intended originally, but it just came out wrong. As for tournament criticism, there's really not much to go on, other than it being very expensive. Let me know what you think. Flibirigit (talk) 19:09, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
@Flibirigit: Sorry. I looked at the revamped section. The POV issue is solved, but can you give it a copy-edit? If not, I can do it, and then I'll approve the DYK. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 00:40, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@DannyS712:, I made some other additions, but I wasn't sure what else needed to be changed. Flibirigit (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
@Flibirigit: I did a minor copy edit, and think that the article is good to go. But, for alt2, we don't need to say 60th year and started in 1960. Please ping me and let me know if I should just approve alt1, or if you want to rephrase alt2. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 02:30, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712:, I have slightly changed ALT2. Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 03:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: It sounds a bit weird. Would you be okay with reordering it? --DannyS712 (talk) 05:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Alt3: ...that the Quebec International Pee-Wee Hockey Tournament (pictured), cofounded by Gérard Bolduc and Paul Dumont, started on this day in 1960?

Mr. Shivers

  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Wing Warping
  • Comment: I've gone through a lot of the stuff that my students have put out and cleaned out the nominations that wouldn't pass, but let me know if I should review another one. I'm listing one of the ones that they nominated that I removed. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 03:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

5x expanded by ReaderofthePack (talk). Self-nominated at 03:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC).

  • I think you've cited the wrong source for the first hook. The Phrase "the idea of The Great Depression" doesn't appear in the Los Angeles Review of Books article. However, when I find the hook fact in the article you've cited two sources for that sentence, and the hook fact does appear in the other one, the Orbit Books review. I haven't finished a full review yet, but wanted to give you the opportunity to correct that. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 14:54, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Shoot, thanks for catching that! I think I probably grabbed the wrong one of the two. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 14:56, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 2[edit]

Ildikó Raimondi

Ildikó Raimondi in 2014
Ildikó Raimondi in 2014

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 17:49, 10 January 2019 (UTC).

Erica Pappritz

Created by Joseph2302 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:18, 2 January 2019 (UTC).

  • minor typo in hook, wasn't sure if it was okay for me to fix it or not valereee (talk) 14:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, would be fine for you to fix it. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Pius F. Koakanu

  • ... that Hawaiian nobleman Pius F. Koakanu served in the House of Representative for two terms and was beaten by rioters in his second terms?
  • Reviewed: Leukoma staminea
  • Comment: Left hook vague by not linking House of Representatives

Created by KAVEBEAR (talk). Self-nominated at 08:27, 2 January 2019 (UTC).

  • The hook needs work, to be honest. First, the vagueness (which is apparently intentional) feels like a bad idea and will likely result in a one-way trip to ERRORS. Second, the hook seems to cram two hook facts at once. Why not simply something like "While serving his second term in the Hawaiian House of Representatives, Pius F. Koakanu was beaten by rioters"? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:39, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... while serving his second term in the Hawaiian House of Representatives, Pius F. Koakanu was beaten by rioters?
@KAVEBEAR: Sorry for the late reply. ALT1 is nice and I'm willing to approve it by itself, but as another possible option, perhaps you could add some context to the hook on why he was beaten up? Something like "Pius F. Koakanu was beaten by rioters as a result/because of...". Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:41, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 3[edit]

Agnes Buntine

Created by SkyGazer 512 (talk). Self-nominated at 16:43, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

Ficus coronulata

  • ... that indigenous people could eat some fruit of the river fig and toss other in the river to attract turtles, which they would then catch? Source

5x expanded by Casliber (talk) and MargaretRDonald (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 11:40, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment Wierd hook! They could, but did they? Did they have to eat some as well? Doesn't it work any more? Should be "others". And please split up that monster para, and say where. ALT1 ... that indigenous people in South-West London (or wherever) tossed fruit of the river fig into the water to attract turtles for food? Johnbod (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Hard to find something interesting to say about it. I mean I thought it was cool how the food was tasty and they enjoyed it and then used it as bait for turtles.

ALT1 ... that indigenous people in the Northern Territory tossed fruit of the river fig into the water to attract turtles for food?

Ian Eaves

  • ... that a dinner-party joke at the Metropolitan Museum of Art caused Ian Eaves to be labeled a prospective thief? Source: The joke is quoted in the New York Times coverage of a banquet at the Met: "'There's a number of things I'd like to make off with if I could be sure I would be undetected,' said a smiling Ian D.D. Eaves, curator of The Armories at Her Majesty's Tower of London." Gandert 1982 and Nathe 2015 treat this seriously (e.g., Gandert: "The idea that just about anybody is capable of theft is not farfetched. Take, for example, the statement of Ian D.D. Eaves..."). Eaves's comment was clearly a joke, as Katz 1983 points out (calling Gandert "a bit credulous").

5x expanded by Usernameunique (talk). Self-nominated at 07:44, 6 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg I am concerned about the wording of the hook because of possible BLP implications. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Narutolovehinata5. What part concerns you? The hook makes it clear that Eaves was joking, and I think the article makes clear than it was ludicrous of Gandert to treat the comment — to a reporter, no less — seriously. —Usernameunique (talk) 03:38, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
The phrase "to be labeled a prospective thief" specifically. Even if intended as a joke, readers may think otherwise until they read the article, and let's face it, not all hook articles are actually read by readers. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:40, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, how about "mislabeled" then? --Usernameunique (talk) 04:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Still not really fond of that label. How about rewriting the hook to emphasize the non-seriousness of the matter? Like showing that it was a joke? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:49, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, I'm a bit confused. His comment is already termed a "dinner-party joke" in the hook; does that not show that it was a joke? --Usernameunique (talk) 14:27, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
I meant to say that it should be emphasized in the hook that the "labeling"/"mislabeling" was never intended to be serious. Plenty of serious disagreements and genuine accusations have been the results of jokes, so that not being the case here needs to be clear. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:18, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5, I had previously thought that your BLP concern was that the hook might treat Eaves unfairly. Your most recent comment, however, makes me think instead that you are concerned the hook may treat Gandert (the labeller/mislabeller) unfairly. Which is it? In either event, I'm happy to send you the sources if that would help—it's pretty clear that Eaves was joking, but Gandert wasn't. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:45, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Lady Shani

  • ...that Lady Shani was involved in a professional wrestling match that got too real, causing one of her opponents to be injured and another not booked again as a result? Source:

Created by MPJ-DK (talk). Self-nominated at 03:58, 3 January 2019 (UTC).

  • MPJ-DK - this needs some editing for tone. There are some point of view statements in the article, such as "The Reina de Reinas championship match at Triplemanía XXV turned out to be more notable for the wrong reasons." This is just a bit too casual and the way it's written, it comes across like it's your own statement about what happened. It's better to write it as something along the lines of "At Triplemanía XXV Lady Shani competed against the defending Sexy Star, as well as Ayako Hamada and Rosemary for the Reina de Reinas championship. The fight received media attention due to statements by Sexy Star, who claims that Lady Shani was "shooting" or legitimately fighting with her instead of the pre-planned match." Basically, saying "wrong reasons" comes with implied meanings and emotions and as such, it's inherently non-neutral. Make sure that the writing style doesn't come across as too casual or non-neutral. I'd recommend styling the sections more along the lines of how the article is written for Ayako Hamada or Mick Foley. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 15:24, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Also be careful of claims like "biggest career accomplishment" for the same reason, unless you have a source that specifically states this. This is something that would also be seen as a judgement call, so I also recommend attributing this to the person making the claim. Any time you have terms that signify that something is better or worse, such as 'prestigious' or 'wrong', I'd use attribution just to defuse concerns that you were inserting personal opinion. On a side note, be careful of the term prestigious, as this is often used by marketing people to promote things - I'd instead use language such as "billed as AAA's most important show of the year" since it gives attribution and also kind of defuses concern about using marketing speak. A second run through also shows some grammatical errors that look to be typos, so definitely review the article to catch these. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 15:31, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your time and the good feedback. I believe I have rewriten those "est" (biggest etc.) phrases to be less praising, mor factual. I re-wrote the begining of the Triplemania section as well to be more encylopedic (I hope) and had a go at fixing typos etc. MPJ-DK (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
ReaderofthePack - I hope you have seen that I've done several updates to address this, can you take a second look at this at some point please? Thanks in advance. MPJ-DK (talk) 12:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)


Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: ????
  • Interesting: ????
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg Just realized that I forgot to ask you to add a source for the hook. (This one is good for the title part.) Also, I tweaked the article as far as the claim goes - I attributed it to the source. I think that it may be better to leave off the booking part since people may differ on whether or not the database is the best source for this. It'd be better to have it be something like "...that during Triplemanía XXV, Lady Shani's match with Sexy Star, Ayako Hamada and Rosemary ended with Sexy Star getting stripped of her title for legitimately injuring Rosemary?" What do you think? ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 21:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

  • Also, wow at Cody Rhodes not wanting to work with Sexy Star again - I can see where she was effectively blackballed from wresting, at least for the time being. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 21:16, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Since the database is the most consistent, comprehensive coverage of matches collected in one place it's the only type of source to support the fact that she has not worked a single AAA match since unless there is a source that says she was outright fired, which I don't remember seeing, AAA just stopped booking her. I did not add in comments from Cody Rhodes or Road Dogs since the article is about Lady Shani, but I have no problem with someone else adding it. Between the source you listed and CageMatch the statements of the hook are sourced. Your alt basically says what mine says - except you'd be unable to approve your own suggestion, so here is one that combines the original and your input for your review. MPJ-DK (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1...that Lady Shani was involved in a professional wrestling match that got too real, causing one of her opponents to be injured and another having her championship taken away?

Articles created/expanded on January 4[edit]

MT MOL FSRU Challenger

Source: "The MOL FSRU Challenger, the world’s largest FSRU, arrived in Turke" [10], "State gas grid operator Botas chartered the vessel ..." [11], "Turkey commissioned on Wednesday the country’s second floating storage and regasification unit (FSRU) at a port in Dörtyol, Hatay " [12]

Created by CeeGee (talk). Self-nominated at 12:55, 7 January 2019 (UTC).

  • I'll be claiming this for review but for now I'll just mention that I'm not really fond of the hook; it seems to have a bit too much detail (does it want to focus on the ship being the largest of its kind, or that it serves at a certain facility?) Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:30, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Psalm 96

"Cantate Domino" in 1477 Hours
"Cantate Domino" in 1477 Hours

5x expanded by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Yoninah (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 12:41, 7 January 2019 (UTC).

George Pullar

Created by Raintheone (talk). Self-nominated at 23:17, 4 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Raintheone: The article is new enough, long enough, stable, and the body is adequately sourced. Right now, the filmography doesn't have any footnotes, and while all roles there are also mentioned in the article text, I'd suggest copying footnotes there as well to prevent confusion. Was unable to find any close paraphrasing. A QPQ has been accomplished. Of the two hooks, the first one is probably the better option and would be of most interest to our predominantly non-Australian readerbase. There are just some things that need to be acknowledged before I can approve this: in addition to the filmography table issue, is there no information about at least a year of birth? In addition, I'd suggest linking to Australian rules football at the first mention of "football"; I know the AFL exists and is linked, but many readers might assume that "football" refers to soccer and not Aussie rules, or that "AFL" refers to American football. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:37, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: - I changed the first instance of football so it links to the AFL article. I could not find an actual birthdate or concrete birth year. I used the template to work out his date of birth year approx. I included a source too. As you mentioned, the roles are already sourced. In general a filmography does not need to be sourced if those roles are already backed up. Per WP:FILMOGRAPHY it states "Source: This is an optional field that is to be used when a work may be obscure or difficult to confirm."Rain the 1 01:29, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

George Meade (merchant)

  • ... that merchant George Meade was called "A Patriot of the Revolutionary Era", although his firm profited from both sides of the American Revolution? Source: "Meade's firm was not the disinterested, patriotic benefactor of the American Revolution described in nineteenth-century accounts but engaged in speculative activities with both British and American investments." Klepp, American National Biography

Created by Kim Post (talk). Self-nominated at 10:31, 4 January 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 5[edit]

Homeric Minimum

Created by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk). Self-nominated at 21:30, 5 January 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 6[edit]

Catarina Macario

Created by SirEdimon (talk). Self-nominated at 00:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article is long enough and new enough with no copyright violations. A QPQ is not needed because this is the user's third nomination. However, the Honors section needs to be referenced. SL93 (talk) 07:05, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Vikram Sood

Vikram Sood
Vikram Sood
  • ... that spymaster Vikram Sood (pictured) was an officer of the Indian Postal Service before he joined the intelligence organisation RAW and later served as its head from 2000 to 2003? Source: "Vikram Sood came to R&AW from the Indian Postal Service and was permanently absorbed in the Research Analysis Service (R&AS), a new All India Service in R&AW created by Indira Gandhi on Kao's advice" (Rediff news).The Unending Game: Ex-spymaster Vikram Sood’s book Firstpost

5x expanded by DiplomatTesterMan (talk) and DBigXray (talk). Nominated by DBigXray (talk) at 20:05, 6 January 2019 (UTC).

Alternate framing of hook 1:-
ALT4 ... that Vikram Sood (pictured) who went on to head the intelligence organisation RAW from 2000 to 2003, was an ex-officer of the Indian Postal Service? Source: "Vikram Sood came to R&AW from the Indian Postal Service and was permanently absorbed in the Research Analysis Service (R&AS), a new All India Service in R&AW created by Indira Gandhi on Kao's advice" (Rediff news) WBGconverse 12:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Added Spymaster in ALT0. Between ALT0 and ALT4 I like ALT0 more because ALT4 gave me an impression that Sood directly became the chief of RAW after leaving postal service, which is not factually correct. He first joined RAW as an officer. DBigXray 12:53, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 7[edit]

Karl Lindau

Karl Lindau
Karl Lindau
  • ... that the Austrian actor and librettist Karl Lindau (pictured) toured the United States, and wrote a farce Der Nazi in 1895? Source: several

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 15:50, 14 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough (created Jan 7, nominated Jan 14), long enough (>1500 characters), is suitably cited, and appears free from plagiarism, paraphrasing and non-neutral language. Assuming some good faith in translating from German Wikipedia since I can't properly vet the original German sources. Image is free and suitably licensed, QPQ done. The hook however needs a bit more consideration. It's not very interesting: an Austrian actor touring the United States is boring and not at all remarkable. A well written tease regarding an 1895 piece called "The Nazi" (we should use English) could be enticing, but I can't seem to actually verify it: the sources cited don't seem to mention "Der Nazi" with respect to Lindau, and I don't see the term "Nazi" in Lindau's WorldCat or DNB listing. (It would also be nice to explain what the name "Nazi" here refers to, as it predates the National Socialist party by some time: was it referring to "a colloquial and derogatory word for a backwards farmer or peasant"?)
Thank you for looking. At the time, German-language theatre was not common to tour the US, other than the big cities, - I'd say not even today. - [13] [14] [15] - Even if I knew what Nazi meant for him (probably you found out), I'd not say it in the hook, - readers should click to find out ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:55, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

2019 College Football Playoff National Championship

5x expanded by Dmoore5556 (talk), PCN02WPS (talk), Muboshgu (talk), and Donnowin1 (talk). Nominated by PCN02WPS (talk) at 16:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC).

Georg Dubislav Ludwig von Pirch

  • ... that Prussian general Georg Dubislav Ludwig von Pirch led a brigade at the Battle of Leipzig and a corps at the Battle of Waterloo? Source: [16] "...and appointed to command the 10th Bde, II Corps. He then fought at Dresden, Kulm (where he won the EK I) and Leipzig." "...he was appointed acting GOC, II Corps; he fought at Ligny and Waterloo."
    • ALT1:... that Prussian general Georg Dubislav Ludwig von Pirch received a command of a corps for the Battle of Waterloo because his predecessor was removed after protesting against harsh treatment of revolting Saxon units? Source: [17] "General Borstell, commander of the II Army Coorps, protested about the rough handling of the Saxon contingent after their rebellion against the Prussians in May 1815 and was sent home. Pirch was placed in command of the corps in his place, but was somewhat out of his depth. After fighting at Ligny and Waterloo..."

5x expanded by Staberinde (talk). Self-nominated at 21:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

Steve Swindal

  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 17:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC).

Shin Hyun-hwak

Created by Bellezzasolo (talk). Self-nominated at 18:29, 7 January 2019 (UTC).

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - The first hook sounds weird. After 6 months, did he become the 14th prime minister? I think only ALT1 works.

QPQ: ????
Overall: Symbol question.svg QPQ still pending. Article has a verification needed tag. DannyS712 (talk) 22:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Regarding the QPQ part, from my searching it seems that Bellezzasolo has 2 DYK credits, in which case a QPQ wouldn't be necessary. However, I just looked at their talk page rather than did a thorough search, so it's possible that I could be missing something.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:20, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
Also pinging Bellezzasolo as they have not (yet) been notified of the review.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 14:22, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 8[edit]

Zuzana Marková (soprano)

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 11:46, 15 January 2019 (UTC).

Eidyn

  • ... that Eidyn, a Brittonic district in present-day Scotland in the Early Middle Ages, is the source of Edinburgh's name? Source: offline: Gelling, Nicolaisen, & Richards book, pp. 88-89.
    • ALT1:... that ...?

Moved to mainspace by Cuchullain (talk). Self-nominated at 13:53, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

Reviewed: Seattle Totem Pole

Piposh (2019 video game)

Created by Coin945 (talk). Self-nominated at 13:49, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

Wayétu Moore

  • ... that Liberian-American writer Wayétu Moore founded a publishing house and nonprofit organization, One Moore Book, which in 2015 opened Liberia's first bookstore devoted to recreational literature? Source: Madam Noire "Now, at 26, Wayetu is the founder and chief executive of One Moore Book, a one-year-old publishing house that develops and distributes books for children in countries with low literacy rates and underrepresented cultures." Source:NY Times"She also plans to reflect on the future of One Moore Book, which she relaunched as a nonprofit in 2015." Source: PRI "One Moore Bookstore, a small shopfront on a busy street in downtown Monrovia, represents many firsts. Though there are stores here that sell text books, this is the first selling books purely for reading pleasure."

Created by Philepitta (talk). Self-nominated at 01:54, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

  • .

Steinbrenner family

George Steinbrenner
George Steinbrenner
  • Reviewed: IOU

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self-nominated at 22:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article has over 3,589 characters. It was created and nominated on January 8. The entire content is referenced and generally covers the topic neutrally. It contains two images with appropriate licenses. QPQ still pending. --Երևանցի talk 06:48, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Yerevantsi, please don't forget to check for close paraphrasing/copyvio/etc., and specify that the hook meets the criteria above. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 15:48, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

I found low level of of similarity. The hook is short enough (~115 words) and is referenced in the article. --Երևանցի talk 12:34, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 9[edit]

Guy Dury

Created by AssociateAffiliate (talk) and Dumelow (talk). Nominated by Dumelow (talk) at 01:02, 17 January 2019 (UTC).

73 Cows

Created by J Milburn (talk). Self-nominated at 18:50, 10 January 2019 (UTC).

Marcus Chamat

5x expanded by Lee Vilenski (talk). Self-nominated at 12:20, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

Presidential exemption for Jews

  • ... that Slovak nationalists claim that Jozef Tiso "saved" as many as 40,000 Jews from his own regime? [20]
  • Reviewed: Max Troll
  • Comment: Review under my previous username, Catrìona

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 11:29, 9 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Oppose the hook: not directly supported neither by the article text nor by the footnote here (which should not be in the hook). Also, the hook must be in WP:NPOV format: no "scary quotes", nor opinions of a particular side. Staszek Lem (talk) 00:05, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
    • Staszek Lem, Nonsense. NPOV does not mean that giving legitimacy to WP:FRINGE views. Giving refs that are offline is not much use to reviewers, but they're cited in text. And how does "Milan Stanislav Ďurica and other Slovak nationalists that Tiso saved as many as 40,000 Jews from his regime's own antisemitic policies"—cited to two academic, peer-reviewed sources—not support the hook? buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 01:44, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
      • For the sake of specific discussion, please provide the quotes from refs that directly (may be slightly rephrased) support your hook, not the refs from which the hook can be derived by a wikipedian. BTW your phrase "NPOV does not mean that giving legitimacy to WP:FRINGE views" makes no sense. Probably grammar. The ref you cited in the hook is not in the text. And do not put ext links in the hook text: it is supposed to be copied into DYK template. Staszek Lem (talk)

Quotes as requested:

...estimates of how many Jews were thus saved from deportation include:... 30,000-40,000 (Milan S. Durica, The Slovak Involvement in the Tragedy of the European Jews [Abano Terme, Italy: Piovan Editore, 1989], p. 12) Ward (2002, p. 593)

Despite the best efforts of leading Slovak historians to lay this numbers dispute to rest, the controversy remains a durable feature of Slovak social and political discourse. It continues to distract many Slovaks from coming to terms with the legacy of collaboration and thus sustains Slovak ultranationalists in their campaign to rehabilitate Tiso and the wartime Slovak state. Ward (2002, pp. 571–572)

In particular, there are already attempts to shift the wartime Slovak president Jozef Tiso (who needs to be held accountable for his actions) from the perpetrator to the rescuer category, since he issued about one thousand presidential exemptions from deportations. Paulovičová (2012, pp. 71–72)

This right-wing national myth is backed up by the historically rooted fact that the president possessed the right to exempt the persecuted Jews from deportation. Although such an option did indeed exist, the number of presidential exemptions has been inflated in order to add an aura of innocence and glory to president-priest Jozef Tiso. According to Milan S. Ďurica, Jozef Tiso and many government members were trying to change the impact of the imfamous Jewish Code and rescue “as many Jews as possible.” In his view, the lack of consensus within the government as well as a lack of understanding and cooperation of Jews with the Slovak government (!) led to the failure of Slovaks to withstand the pressure of Germans, who were responsible for the Holocaust in Slovakia. Liberal historian Ivan Kamenec decisively refutes this myth and offers a more balanced view on the issue of presidential exemptions. According to Kamenec, Tiso’s office had received about 20,000 requests for presidential exemptions from the Jewish Code, but granted only a thousand exemptions, which altogether allowed for the protection of 5000-6000 Jews. Paulovičová (2012, p. 27)

Scholars don't view this as a legitimate debate, but rather a politically motivated attempt to rehabilitate the Tiso regime. buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 02:15, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

(1) In other words, Tiso did save several thousand Jews, with exact numbers contested. (2) The article is about Tiso's decree not about Slovak nationalists. These may claim 200,000 saved, but fringe views cannot be the hook of WP:DYK. (Not to say that the article says the " controversial textbook" .. ."later retracted", so nothing to speak about at all) (3) The hook does not reflect the article adequately. The main issue not not what fringe nationalists say, but that Tiso's decree was far from being Jew-saving. Please think of a better hook. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Something like:
  • DYK hooks routinely deal with peripheral facts and are still acceptable as long as the fact in question is true. Your proposed hook is not interesting because it is widely known that most Jews in Europe were murdered and only a few managed to escape. The discrepancy in figures is that Kamenec's include all exemptions issued while Ward is only counting those issued before October 1942, when the deportations were halted. (Exemptions issued after that did not save their holders from death). I am not sure where you are getting the 200,000 figure from, there were only 89,000 Jews in Slovakia. However, perhaps a more hooky way to present this might be
  • ALT2:... that Slovak nationalists have exaggerated the number of presidential exemptions issued in order to minimize the complicity of Jozef Tiso for the Holocaust in Slovakia?
    Oppose alt2 in favor of alt1: Same problem: alt1 is about exemptions, alt2 is about nationalists: once again: fringe views should not have prominence in wikipedia in any form. Also, wikipedia is not a place to combat nationalists and other bad people. It is a historical fact that exemptions were a sham. Period. We dont care what nationalists say. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:18, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I would like to request a new reviewer because I feel that Staszek Lem is applying his own preferences, rather than the DYK criteria. In addition, he has wrongly inserted cleanup tags into the article and repeatedly moved it to an incorrect name. buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 03:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Wrong. My "oppose" vote at the very top is strictly according to DYK rules. Let me repeat it in an itemized format:
  • The hook in non-neutral because it is an opinion, and of a fringe opinion, too.
    not addressed at all
  • The hook is false; at the very least it has no direct support by refs
    The wall of the quoted text shows that the nom has to peruse WP:SYNTH policy. I am sorry to remind an editor since 2012 about it.
The rest of my comments are more detailed explanations of my reasoning. Did not help, sorry for my English.
As for the rest of false accusations:
  • The editors should not remove cleanup tags without addressing the issue raised
  • Disputes about page names is a normal editing process. BTW the original article title was "Presidential exemption" (I have already written a reasonable stub). In the future the article creator better do some googling; often one will be surprised.
I wasted my time to read around the subject and suggested ALT1 hook which covers the controversy with the exemptions, stated in the form of a fact assumed by mainstream, rather than in the form of a fringe view.
That said, I don't mind third opinion, but whatever it will be, my objections must be addressed. Staszek Lem (talk) 17:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • If I may budge in. @Staszek Lem: WADR I think you are wrong with the assumption that a hook should not present fringe opinions; as long as those fringe ideas are attributed and it is clear from the context that they are opinions, and evidently as long as the article itself is neutral, this is not actually an issue. Hooks are meant to draw readers in, and usually this is done by focusing on some unusual fact, which fringe opinions are, by definition. I will add that I don't see ay evidence of WP:SYNTH, neither in how the article was written nor in how the hook is presented. @Buidhe: WADR I think the hook is wrong in not clearly attributing the opinion to some Slovak nationalists, something which the article does in fact do. It is perfectly conceivable that other Slovak nationalists may not share this stance, not any particular desire to rehabilitate Tiso. The very source you quote suggests that opposition to Tiso from within nationalist ranks began during and because of the deportations, even by some who had reaped the benefits of antisemitic persecution; it also clearly mentions that die-hard Tiso fans are on the "fringes of society"; and also indicates that the Slovak nationalist Fico was behind the initiative to commemorate the Holocaust in Slovakia.
    I'm not sure which title is "correct", they both appear quite similar. The objection that "for Jews" is a misnomer seems weak. since even those Christians spared by the exception were identified as Jews (right?). There is also absoltely nothing wrong with "Presidential exception (Holocaust)". If you can't decide, why not go for something along rthe lines of Presidential exception (Tiso)? Dahn (talk) 12:32, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
    • @Dahn: I don't object to any of the proposed disambiguators. My main objection to "Presidential exemptions for Jews" is that this nomenclature isn't in any of the sources. Yes, "Slovak nationalists" is probably too broad as a category. How about "Slovak ultranationalists" (per source above)? buidhe 13:31, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
      • ALT3:... that Slovak ultranationalists claim that Jozef Tiso "rescued" as many as 40,000 Jews from his own regime's antisemitic policies?
      • ALT4:... that Slovak ultranationalists have exaggerated the number of presidential exemptions issued, in order to minimize the complicity of Jozef Tiso for the Holocaust in Slovakia?
        • @Buidhe: Before reviewing further, I'm going to give Staszek the opportunity to weigh in as well; it seems like we already have a compromise on the article name. For now, I note that there might be some issue with the new alts, since "ultranationalists" is more precise than the source: I actually believe that "that some Slovak nationalists" closely mirrors the language of the source/s. Also, I think you need a comma between "issued" and "in" in ALT4, because otherwise it reads like the exceptions were issued by someone with the goal of minimizing Tiso's complicity. Dahn (talk) 14:20, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
          • I'm OK with the "some nationalists" wording; I think both would be fine. I would note that "ultranationalists" is based directly on one of the sources: "this numbers dispute... sustains Slovak ultranationalists in their campaign to rehabilitate Tiso and the wartime Slovak state". It also depicts the fringe nature of this campaign better than "some nationalists". Comma added. buidhe 14:51, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
            • Ah yes, Ward does use the term, my bad. I had only looked for wording in the Kamenec interview, which is the prime source you indicated here. Yes, either works. I presume "ultranationalists" conveys the meaning better and would also address Staszek's comments about the fringe nature of the opinion. (The article on Milan Stanislav Ďurica also clarifies that the epithet was used for him as well, though he is not mentioned here in the hook and this should not therefore be a BLP redflag.) Dahn (talk) 15:27, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on January 10[edit]

MLS Cup 2005

  • ... that MLS Cup 2005 featured the same teams and ended with the same scoreline as MLS Cup 2002? Source: Worcester Telegram & Gazette (via AP)
  • Reviewed: TBD

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 03:45, 17 January 2019 (UTC).

SurfSafe

Created by Daniel Case (talk). Self-nominated at 07:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC).

Kunság

Banner of Cumania (Kunság) in 1618
Banner of Cumania (Kunság) in 1618

5x expanded by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 06:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC).

James Gayley

Improved to Good Article status by Semmendinger (talk). Self-nominated at 19:26, 10 January 2019 (UTC).

OK gesture

Improved to Good Article status by Morganfitzp (talk). Self-nominated at 21:53, 10 January 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 11[edit]

Sepioteuthis australis

  • ... that an egg strand of the southern reef squid, containing six to nine eggs, is most commonly sired by three different males? Source: "The most common number of sires within a single egg strand was three."
    • ALT1:... that an egg strand of the southern reef squid is most commonly sired by three different males?

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 07:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC).

Siegfried Geißler

  • Reviewed: Tucson Girl's Chorus

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 17:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC).

Connect Airways

  • ... that Connect Airways, involving Virgin Atlantic, was created to take over Flybe; who had themselves taken over Virgin's domestic operations at Heathrow Airport? Source: The Independent

Created by Rosbif73 (talk) and The C of E (talk). Nominated by The C of E (talk) at 10:32, 16 January 2019 (UTC).

Pierre Cangioni

Created by Joseph2302 (talk). Self-nominated at 10:23, 13 January 2019 (UTC).

Kenshi (video game)

  • ... that the creator of Kenshi initially had to have a part-time security guard job in order to make ends meet while making the game? Source: "For the first five or six years, I worked alone on it full time whilst juggling a minimum wage security guard job during the nights to get by." ([21])
    • ALT1:... that the creator of Kenshi was inspired by stories of wondering ronin in creating the game? Source: "Kenshi has a lot of influences, particularly the concept of a wandering desperate Samurai ronin, or a hungry survivor roaming a desolate wasteland." ([22])

Created by Nomader (talk). Self-nominated at 20:50, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

Gaspar Jiménez, Emilio Milián

Created by Vanamonde93 (talk). Self-nominated at 20:16, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

United States v. 422 Casks of Wine

Created by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 10:31, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

Deadwax

  • ... that before releasing the Shudder original series Deadwax, Graham Reznick co-wrote the story for the popular interactive video game Until Dawn? Source: "Created by sound designer Graham Reznick, who co-wrote the PlayStation hit Until Dawn, Deadwax will drop all eight of its 10-ish-minute episodes at once." SyFy
    • ALT1:... that the rare, much sought after record on Deadwax has killer sound? Source: "First up, Deadwax, Shudder's short-form horror series about one vinyl collector's obsessive search for a record that kills anyone who listens to it has landed a premiere date on Shudder." SyFy

Created/expanded by ReaderofthePack (talk). Self-nominated at 15:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 12[edit]

Thessaloniki Metro

  • ... that the construction of the Thessaloniki Metro inadvertently started the largest archaeological excavation in the history of northern Greece, with over 300,000 individual artefacts spanning over 2,000 years of history unearthed so far? Source: from within the article itself (heavily sourced on there) - "The project triggered the largest archaeological dig in northern Greek history, covering a 20-square-kilometre (7.7 sq mi) area. [...] The discovery of a Byzantine road at Venizelou station was a major archaeological find: 75 metres (246 ft) of the marble-paved and column-lined road was unearthed, with shops, other buildings, and plumbing which one scholar called "the Byzantine Pompeii". [...] Other important discoveries included a headless statue of Aphrodite, fourth-century-AD mosaics, a golden wreath, a bath complex, urban villas, and 50,000 coins. Artefacts from the 1917 fire were also found. [...] Over 300,000 artefacts have been unearthed to date."

Improved to Good Article status by Philly boy92 (talk). Self-nominated at 14:22, 12 January 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
  • Interesting: Green tickY
  • Other problems: Red XN - Over 200 characters hook
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg Eddie891 Talk Work 00:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

I'm happy with either of the 3 alternatives. The part of about the 2000s being unsourced can't be sourced because it is a negative - what is sourced is that there was an effort in 1918, abandoned, an effort in 1968 (?), abandoned, and an effort in 1988, abandoned. The next one started in 2003, and is to be completed next year. –Michail (blah) 09:23, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Philly boy92 How about the neutrality concern above? Eddie891 Talk Work 16:21, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Eddie891 I've just updated it, let me know what you think. If you think the quote on the prose further down the article is still inappropriate, how would you propose it be dealt with? On a second reading of the alternatives, I would prefer ALT3. Apologies for the mistake with length, it's my first time nominating and I was not aware of the restriction. And thanks for taking the time to review this. --Michail (blah) 17:06, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

SB Centaur

  • ... that SB Centaur was built in 1895, carried cargo throughout the First and Second World Wars and is still available for hire? Source:[23], [24].
  • Reviewed: Lü Junchang
  • Comment: Thoughts on ALTs would be welcome.

Improved to Good Article status by Gog the Mild (talk). Self-nominated at 16:44, 12 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment: @Gog the Mild: The source http://www.bargetrust.org/ which is used in the article is possibly not a reliable source, in particular per WP:SPS. I suggest consulting Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. I want to add that, though, sometimes materials meet inclusion policies, but we have to rely on relatively poorer sources since there's not any better source for some reason. --Z 17:05, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi ZxxZxxZ. Thanks for taking a look at this. The TBT link above was only there to cover the "carried cargo throughout the ... Second World War..." bit. This is briefly covered in National Historic Ships UK. "CENTAUR resumed trade around the Thames and East Anglia for the rest of the war". Hopefully this is sufficiently reliable. I have added a cite in the appropriate place in the article. So the hook is now referenced to RSs. Or is it a case that the use of this source elsewhere in the article makes it unsuitable for the front page? In which case a quick fail is probably in order. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:13, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, I was refering to the article itself. Regards, Z 19:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi User:ZxxZxxZ. Fair point. I haven't done any substantial work on this since last September and I don't really have the time or motivation for that size of job. So I am going to withdraw the nomination. So far as I can see, the only way to do this is to attach Symbol delete vote.svg. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Lulu Grace Graves

Lulu Grace Graves
Lulu Grace Graves

Sources: June Payne-Palacio, Deborah Canter, The Profession of Dietetics (Jones & Bartlett Learning 2010): 12-13. ISBN 9780763790066; Glenna McCollum, "Leadership in Nutrition and Dietetics: Today's Wisdom for Tomorrow's Leaders" Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (May 2014): 53.

Created by Penny Richards (talk). Self-nominated at 18:36, 12 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Review: Article's new enough and long enough; citations are inline and the references are OK; No copyvio or policy issues; hook fact is sourced and the formatting is OK; the image is OK. --Z 16:18, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Adele Spitzeder

 
 

Created by SoWhy (talk). Self-nominated at 17:50, 12 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment: @SoWhy: I couldn't find the first hook fact in the sources given; apparently, they only speak of using pyramid system. So please explicitly cite a source that support the hook fact if you want to keep it. --Z 15:48, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
    @ZxxZxxZ: The problem stems from the fact that in German there is no distinction between "ponzi" or "pyramid", both are summarized as "snowball" schemes. This source mentions her at the same time as Madoff and Ponzi but points out that "ponzi", "snowball" and "chain letter" are used synonymously these days. This source calls her one of Ponzi's forerunners. This paper contains the sentence "Two early historical examples of documented Ponzi schemes are Adele Spitzeder’s “Dachauer Bank” that operated a couple of years until 1872 in Germany". Is any of those sufficient? Then I will add it to the article. Otherwise I'll check for more later. I'm okay with changing "ponzi scheme" to "snowball scheme" as well though. Regards SoWhy 16:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
    Thanks for clarification, that's true. But the tone in the first hook has made it interesting at the cost of accuracy. Apparently, the provided sources use a more cautious tone and none of them exactly claim that this person was the inventor of the ponzi scheme, and although the reader may interpret them as such, the article should reflect the sources exactly as they are. I think the hook can be rephrased a bit to make it more consistent with the sources. --Z 17:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
    The German word has two different translations and the English sources tell us which translation is correct, so the question is whether it's a violation of WP:SYNTH to base the translation off the English sources. To that effect, I have opened a question at WP:NORN and am waiting for responses. Regards SoWhy 20:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Current nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on January 13[edit]

David Johnson (photographer)

David Johnson
David Johnson

Created by Animalparty (talk). Self-nominated at 05:38, 17 January 2019 (UTC).

HMS P222

P222 on the surface
P222 on the surface
  • Reviewed: Cnemidocarpa finmarkiensis
  • Comment: Fact is interesting because normally submarines do anything to avoid being spotted and attacked on the surface by aircraft

Improved to Good Article status by L293D (talk) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk). Nominated by L293D (talk) at 03:30, 17 January 2019 (UTC).

Hamilton Hamilton

  • ... that Hamilton Hamilton was a landscape painter and helped found the Silvermine Guild of Artists ...? Source: "After Borglum's death, he and others founded the Silvermine Guild of Artists. At the time of his death, he was known as the Dean of the group." [25] and [26] and [27]

Created by Dmadeo (talk). Self-nominated at 12:05, 15 January 2019 (UTC).

..... sofferte onde serene ...

CAPTION TEXT GOES HERE
CAPTION TEXT GOES HERE

Created by Ron Oliver (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 17:07, 14 January 2019 (UTC).

Articles created/expanded on January 14[edit]

Jon Teske

Jon Teske
Jon Teske

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 20:43, 16 January 2019 (UTC).


@world record egg

  • ... that an image of an egg posted on the social media service Instagram became the most liked post of all time? "Ten days later, we can report that the egg has done it." Source: Congratulations to this egg on becoming Instagram’s most-liked post ever
    • ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Created/expanded by SamHolt6 (talk), Nixinova (talk), AceTankCommander (talk), StrayBolt (talk), and 7&6=thirteen (talk). Nominated by 7&6=thirteen () at 16:32, 16 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Doing a more thorough review, I see a few more issues:
  • The hook doesn't make it clear whether it's the most liked post on Instagram of all time or the most liked post online of all time. The article says both (the second would obviously be more significant). If you mean the second, then that's not directly cited in the article; the only citation following the claim taking the world record for the most liked online post is this which doesn't mention anything about the egg.
  • There's a citation needed tag in the history section
  • Anastasia Denisova, a researcher of internet memes at the University of Westminster, compares it to the campaign to get a British research vessel named Boaty McBoatface, which is not in a quote, is almost directly copied-and-pasted from https://www.wired.co.uk/article/instagram-egg-world-record.
  • Besides the AfD problem, the issues pointed out above are fairly minor. Overall, the article appears to be well-written and I absolutely love the hook. Face-smile.svg--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Philip Hugh-Jones

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 21:19, 15 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Doing... -Nizil (talk) 05:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Whispyhistory and Philafrenzy:Symbol question.svg The article is new, long enough, cited, no copyvio. The hook is interesting and cited. QPQ needed. The language in the article seem bit strange to me. For example, the product of an affair can be substituted with an illegitimate child. Is it necessary to list all other names It was later known as atypical diabetes, phasic insulin-dependent diabetes, ketosis-prone type 2 diabetes and Flatbush diabetes and is now referred to as atypical ketosis-prone diabetes or type 1B diabetes in the WHO classification or the last two are enough? The article can be copyedited by someone at WP:GOCE if you think that is required. His marriages are covered in Early Life which can be moved to Personal life if it seem OK. Please check External links again and remove which does not follow WP:EL. Please also format them as per MOS:LINK#External links section. These are small improvements. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 05:57, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you for such speedy response. We will check over and ping when done. Whispyhistory (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Should be OK now apart from any more medical details Whispyhistory wishes to add. Was Diabetes previously in types but different types? Could also do with his more significant articles being added and the lead expanding. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:28, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Now article looks better. Image of his father looks unnecessary because it can be seen on article of his father. The lead says about emphysema but there is no information on it in the main content. Can you are line or two on it in the Career? I have made few tweaks. QPQ is still pending. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 05:01, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
Expanded lead. Can we say how diabetes was previously classified? Philafrenzy (talk) 08:43, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy:. If someone had already classified diabetes, he is not first to classify. We can simply write he introduced terms type 1 and type 2 to classify diabetes and tweak in the hook may require. Sources say he introduced terms type 1 and 2, as clinical classification. Before it it was termed as primary and secondary diabetes and other ways of classification. A footnote on previous classifications in the article may help.-Nizil (talk) 13:53, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
That was my point. The article needs to say what came before and how his classification was different. Why do you wish to put personal life after death? Philafrenzy (talk) 13:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
hi @Nizil Shah:...I have added a QPQ and found more information on Hugh-Jones, which may lead to an alternative hook. May I request a day or two to go over before you complete a review? Regarding diabetes, he definetly coined type 1 and 2, but was not the first to distinguish 2 types. Whispyhistory (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
@Philafrenzy:. Some article such as Salman Khan have separate personal life section after other sections. It is not necessary but my preference. You may restore it to former if you like. @Whispyhistory: I can wait and may conduct new full review. You can reword the hook to reflect that he coined the terms. Thank you for taking the review positively and working more on the article. Regards,-Nizil (talk) 06:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
I can not find DYK nomination of Padina boergesenii. Can you provide link to that page? So I can verify QPQ.-Nizil (talk) 06:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Kindly...I have corrected the QPQ link (sorry). I'll ping when I'm done with article. Whispyhistory (talk) 18:56, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Ichiki Tatsuo

Created by Juxlos (talk). Self-nominated at 18:31, 14 January 2019 (UTC).

Ferdinand Rudow

  • Reviewed: QPQ required but pending.
  • Comment: The history looks a bit wonky because I imported the French Wikipedia article (fr:Ferdinand Rudow) to our redlink, thinking I was just going to translate what they had and leave it as a stub. But then I got interested in how hilariously useless this guy apparently was and wound up writing a ton more, basically to the point where there is nothing left of the translated version. However, if my reviewer wants to judge it as expanded rather than new content, it is more than a 5x expansion of the imported version, so it ought to qualify on that basis as well.

Created/expanded by Premeditated Chaos (talk). Self-nominated at 13:57, 14 January 2019 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg Interesting life, on good source, no copyvio obvious. Should we really only mention where he failed? How about also his donation to the museum? - Next time: don't import, just use {{translated}} on the talk. It's easier to read, and less confusing for DYK check. How about his image for this nom? How about an infobox? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:40, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Lionel Bostock, Garluark

Created by AssociateAffiliate (talk) and Dumelow (talk). Nominated by Dumelow (talk) at 10:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC).

Managing by wire