This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors. Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.

Did you know?
Introduction and rules
Introduction	WP:DYK
General discussion	WT:DYK
Guidelines	WP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructions	WP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an article	WP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approval	WP:DYKN
Approved	WP:DYKNA
April 1 hooks	WP:DYKAPRIL
Holding area	WP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queues	T:DYK/Q
Prepper instructions	WP:DYKPBI
Admin instructions	WP:DYKAI
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
History
Statistics	WP:DYKSTATS
Archived sets	WP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wraps	WP:DYKW
Awards	WP:DYKAWARDS
Userboxes	WP:DYKUBX
Hall of Fame	WP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominations	WP:DYKNC
... by promotions	WP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and bots	WP:DYKSB
On the Main Page	T:DYK
Main Page errors	WP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins	{{DYK admins}}
v t e

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

Count of DYK Hooks
Section	# of Hooks	# Verified
July 18	3	1
July 19	1
July 25	2	1
July 26	2
July 27	2	1
July 28	4
July 29	2
July 30	1
August 1	3
August 3	1
August 4	1
August 5	5	2
August 6	4	2
August 7	4	4
August 8	2	1
August 9	1
August 10	8	5
August 11	5	2
August 12	4	4
August 13	2	2
August 14	9	6
August 15	6	5
August 16	6	3
August 17	8	4
August 18	9	8
August 19	7	3
August 20	5	3
August 21	3	1
August 22	5	4
August 23	9	2
August 24	7	1
August 25	10	3
August 26	5	2
August 27	13	9
August 28	14	6
August 29	16	6
August 30	21	7
August 31	9	6
September 1	7	5
September 2	9	4
September 3	7	3
September 4	7	5
September 5	5	3
September 6	7	4
September 7	11	2
September 8	8	4
September 9	9	2
September 10	6	1
September 11	5
September 12
Total	300	137
Last updated 01:23, 12 September 2024 UTC Current time is 04:21, 12 September 2024 UTC [refresh]

How do I write an interesting hook?

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

When will my nomination be reviewed?

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

Where is my hook?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Handy copy sources:

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• ... that David Yong's interest in K-pop started after he took his younger brother to a Twice concert in 2017? Source: https://www.tnp.sg/entertainment/music/singaporean-lawyer-ceo-david-yong-makes-k-pop-debut-signs-mamamoos-agency
  • ALT1: ... that Singapore-born businessman and K-Pop singer David Yong invested 10 billion won ($7.5 million USD) to an entertainment agency that faced a legal dispute with its only artist? Source: https://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20240303050161
  • ALT2: ... that before Singaporean artist David Yong mounted his music career, he was the chief executive officer of a timber firm? Source: [1]
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Blinking Sam

~ Tails Wx 00:23, 18 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: - Not done
Overall: I want to suggest linking "an entertainment agency" and "its only artist" to their respective articles, but not sure if that would be overlinking. Just a thought—otherwise all looks good. I prefer ALT0, just waiting for QPQ now. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 01:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I did consider linking those terms, but ultimately decided not to because of the aforementioned reason. QPQ now done. Thanks for the review, Bsoyka! ~ Tails Wx 20:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Works for me—here's the beautiful green stamp of approval. Great work here! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 21:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't know if DYK?again is the right icon to use here, but a question popped up on my talk page which might affect this nom, so I'll just copy that to this page and let the conversation continue here. RoySmith (talk) 20:33, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• From the discussion above: I definitely do think that the recent news does impact ALT1, though ALT0 doesn't seem to be impacted by this, other than the mention of Yong. The reviewer, Bsoyka, did prefer ALT0, and I almost don't see a problem with it being accepted, other than given the recent news on Yong's financial problems, which does make me re-think that for a bit. ~ Tails Wx 03:06, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DYKBLP suggests avoiding undue attention on contentious information, but negative developments do not disqualify a subject from being on DYK as long as BLP and other guidelines/policies are followed. As long as the article is updated, and given how Yong is not primarily known for the recent incident, I can't see how the latest incident should prevent this from being promoted with ALT0. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:35, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My only concern is ALT1. I am ambivalent about the rest. – robertsky (talk) 16:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't find ALT0 interesting either @Tails Wx:. My suggestion would be something along the lines of "that before David Yong mounted a music career, he had been the chief executive officer of a timber firm".--Launchballer 07:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I've rephrased your suggested hook a bit and added ALT2 above. ~ Tails Wx 03:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then we need another reviewer to tick it off.--Launchballer 07:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the Khalji Revolution led by Jalaluddin Khalji saw the fall of the Turkic Mamluk Dynasty and the rise of the Turko-Afghan Khalji dynasty to rule the Delhi Sultanate?

• Reviewed:

Noorullah (talk) 03:06, 18 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Not a review, but just wanted to leave some alts:

ALT1: ...that during the Khalji Revolution, the sultan Qaiqabad was wrapped in a carpet and thrown into the Yamuna river?

ALT2: ...that the child sultan Shamsuddin Kayumars was imprisoned and deposed as a result of the Khalji Revolution?

Kimikel (talk) 03:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will review the original hook

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - The hook is mentioned in the lead, as a summary of things explained in greater detail in the article. It has no reference (the lead does not need it), but the hook is then no mentioned in any single referenced sentence.
• Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: I changed the licence of File:Maginary portrait of Sultan Firuz Khalji, Khwaja Hasan, and a dervish..jpg from PD-ART-70 to PD-ArT-100 (it is from 1640) Cambalachero (talk) 23:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could do one of the alt's suggested instead then. Noorullah (talk) 01:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The two ALT hooks are referenced as part of a reference that covers a whole paragraph. The reference should be placed specifically on the sentence being used, even if repetitive. I may accept the article anyway, but then someone else would roll it back and ask the same thing, so let's do it right from the start. Cambalachero (talk) 19:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Noorullah21: Please address the above.--Launchballer 20:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, forgot about this, will try to come up with some other hooks soon. Noorullah (talk) 23:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that PGA Tour golfer Max Greyserman's mother competed in a golf tournament 13 years after being diagnosed with multiple sclerosis?

or ALT1:

• ... that PGA Tour golfer Max Greyserman and his brother Reed are the first brothers to win the New Jersey Amateur Championship?

or ALT2:

• ... that a year before golfer Max Greyserman earned his first PGA Tour card, he considered a different career path?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A91E:FA5D:EAB2:D6B0 (talk) 08:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• • Reviewed: Masada myth
  • Comment: Nominated on behalf of an IP editor who will, as usual, provide the QPQ.

Schwede66 08:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: 8 of the 16 citations were checked for verification and close paraphrasing; no issues arose. I prefer ALT2 because the focus is on the subject of the article. ALT1 may mention a record being set, but the PGA Tour is more prestigious than the New Jersey Amateur Championship, so I still prefer ALT2. Yue🌙 17:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Unpromoted per WP:ERRORS RoySmith (talk) 15:07, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sigh, I forgot to add an icon. The WP:ERRORS discussion was essentially A huge portion of this article rests on sources connected to the subject, like his old university and the PGA and the U.S. Open – WP:RS requires that articles be based on independent sources. Also, a significant portion of the article is WP:PROSELINE statistics, which read really awkwardly and make the article feel half-finished. RoySmith (talk) 18:37, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Schwede66: Please address the above.--Launchballer 15:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I will see if I can address Roy's concerns over the next few days. Thank you. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:1979:BEF5:5AEC:99F4 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roy. While I have some views as to the difference between league sources and team or self-published sources as to independence, I've made revisions to the article that I hope will address your concern sufficiently. If not let me know, and I will try to do more. And explain what I at least see as the difference mentioned, and why that difference is important to the goal of wp:errors. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:ECDF:78AA:BB1B:9EDE (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:PROSELINE to understand the problem with the Amateur career and Professional career sections. @Theleekycauldron: who raised the original issue at WP:ERRORS.— Preceding unsigned comment added by RoySmith (talk • contribs)

• Don't think I have much to add; some positive changes in the article, but i'd still like to see a reduction in the non-independent sources. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK. I'll seek to make some further positive changes to the article along the lines requested to reduce sourcing to league publication. Also, understanding that proseline is an essay, I'll see what more can be done there. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A13D:8F1E:26A2:8F66 (talk) 09:43, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • theleekycauldron I've sought to make further positive changes to the article along the lines requested. Although I would be remiss if I did not point out that I still after consideration believe that there is a great difference between a source that is not independent because it is an autobiography, or even the site of a team, and on the other hand a site of the official WP-accepted source of statistics for a league. Treating them all the same does, I expect, lead us to stray somewhat from the goal of the rule in the first place - which is to avoid COI sourcing. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:F485:C373:DBEC:EA24 (talk) 07:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • at this point, I think it's best for me to leave this to an independent reviewer. I will say briefly that I strongly disagree with your view of the independence of leagues from their players, especially as it concerns non-team sports. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • A new reviewer seems like an apt suggestion. Thanks. How do we request that?

As to your last point, there are of course very few PGA refs at this point. Notably few, as a percentage of refs in the article. And given that the PGA is the official source for bland golf information such as "He ranked fifth on the Tour in putting average," and "he came in 4th at competition x," which is how it's used as a ref here, I'm frankly still not seeing the purpose of the "independent source" rule in its application here - unless you think that the PGA stats are not to be relied upon, unless ESPN or some other RS reports them. Golf Magazine is obtaining that information from another source - it does not generate that information itself - the same as MLB.com and NFL.com in those sports. That strikes me as perhaps somewhat short of a COI concern; and COI is no doubt the basis for the rule in the first place. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:4569:133E:18AA:23EF (talk) 02:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Julie Roy was the first woman to successfully sue her therapist for sexual coercion?

• ALT1: ... that a future high-profile divorce lawyer represented Julie Roy in the first successful lawsuit against a therapist for sexual coercion? Source: Betrayal - https://archive.org/details/betrayaltruestor00free/mode/2up - referred to as "Bob Cohen" through the book, the foreword gives thanks to "Robert Stephan Cohen and Loren H. Plotkin for their support and assistance"
• Reviewed:
• Comment: this is my second DYK nomination. i learned from the mistakes I made the first time, made sure to cite all important claims in the article, waited until the article was properly evaluated to submit the DYK, and will be active in fixing any issues that may arise.

jeschaton (immanentize) 21:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

As this is a "first" hook, per WP:DYKHOOK, sourcing has to be exceptionally strong to make sure that the fact about it being the first of its kind is accurate. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:20, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neither hook is fine. The first, as said, needs an exceptionally strong source, and it cites a dictionary. The second has a WP:EASTEREGG link. And overall, people notable for only one event should not have an article about the person, but about the event. Please rearrange the info accordingly, and we may make a full review. Cambalachero (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeschaton: Please address the above.--Launchballer 20:25, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that a parrot reportedly screamed profanities at the funeral of Andrew Jackson?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Zhong Jingwen

Di (they-them) (talk) 02:33, 26 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• - Age and length are fine. No copvio/plagiarism concerns (Earwig = 26% but it's a quote). The hook is entertaining, and reliably sourced. I think it's good to go. KJP1 (talk) 05:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Pulled per Wikipedia talk:Did you know#Prep 6: Poll (parrot) (nom). SL93 (talk) 16:04, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Di (they-them): Please address the contents of Wikipedia talk:Did you know/Archive 201#Prep 6: Poll (parrot) (nom).--Launchballer 20:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer: I believe I already addressed the concerns in the discussion. The sources cited are reliable and the hook is confirmed by the sources. Di (they-them) (talk) 20:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the article, I agree. I just tried to rearrange the article so that it would not deserve {{lead extra info}}, but did not see the words "African grey" in either of the sources in the lead. I think this should be added to the body and cited.--Launchballer 08:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Shapez 2 went from a plain white background to outer space? Source: Hardcore Gamer
  • ALT1: ... that there are a total of 65,536 possible shapes in Shapez 2? Source: Calculated: 2^(4*4)=65536
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: (please  mention me on reply)

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 04:36, 26 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I've added an image on the right, which could be used if ALT1 is promoted. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 04:50, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article is new and just barely long enough, by a margin of 17 bytes. Sourcing in the article looks good, and Earwig checks out. Image licensing looks alright as well. I don't love ALT0 (not quite interesting enough and lacks context), and ALT1 is not present in the article. QPQ is not required as nominator has 1 prior DYK nom. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 13:42, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @PCN02WPS: I'll do some expansion later, so length shouldn't be an issue. I agree that the hooks aren't that good, so what about something like this: ALT2: " ... that unlike its 2D monochrome predecessor, Shapez 2 features 3D conveyer belts in space?" The source for ALT2 is the same Hardcore Gamer article. Alternatively, I could add the information in ALT1 to the article. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 14:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @PCN02WPS: Have your concerns been addressed, and this approved? If not, what else needs to be done? Z1720 (talk) 16:44, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New reviewer needed unless PCN02WPS returns. Z1720 (talk) 14:41, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• sorry all, haven't spent much sustained time on WP recently. I still don't love this hook; it's set up like "monochrome" is going to be contrasted by something later in the hook (especially given it's linked) but nothing in the hook mentions the second iteration being multicolored at all. ALT2 also has the issue that it's not mentioned in the article as worded in the hook. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 20:42, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping CanonNi PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:35, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• PCN02WPS Thanks for the ping. Yeah... ALT2 isn't that good either. The information in ALT1 is mentioned in the gameplay section, and I could reword it so that it's similar to the hook. Another possible hook (ALT3) could be "... that in later stages of the game Shapez 2, players will need to supply four thousand copies of the same shape every minute?" The source is this RPS review. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 02:08, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @CanonNi: ALT3 is my favorite. But, again, it is not mentioned in the article. This is a necessity for DYK, see WP:DYKHFC. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:25, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @PCN02WPS: Sorry for the late reply; I was quite busy last week. Thanks for pointing the issue out. I'll add the information in ALT3 to the article now. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to note that the current image shown is from the original Shapez, and not Shapez 2. 64.39.209.163 (talk) 16:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @CanonNi: the fact in the article still does not match the hook. If the IP user above me is correct, the picture will probably need to be dropped or changed as well. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 14:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Also, looking again at the source, it seems as though this need for 4,000 shapes per minute is a result of this particular user's save file and is not necessarily an unavoidable requirement within the game. As such, I think ALT3 might be slightly misleading in its wording. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Reminder ping CanonNi PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CanonNi: Given that all of the above hooks violate at least the spirit of WP:DYKFICTION if not the letter as well, I will close this if I don't see an WP:DYKINTeresting hook in the next 24 hours.--Launchballer 16:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Henry Bubb (pictured) started as a loan clerk before becoming the president of Capitol Federal Savings Bank 15 years later? Source: "Henry A. Bubb". Kansas Business Hall of Fame. Retrieved 2024-07-24.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
  • Comment: Thanks for the review!

Bsoyka (t • c • g) 23:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I will take this review. Dwkaminski (talk) 20:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - see comments below
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - hook says he started as loan clerk but source only states clerk
• Interesting: - Interesting but perhaps a slight rewrite? Current phrasing makes it seem like he went straight from clerk to president. Also leaves out his role as chairman. Something like "Henry Bubb started as a clerk and became/moved up/progressed to president and chairman of the board of Capitol Federal Savings Bank 15 years later"

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Dwkaminski (talk) 20:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sourcing:

• I can't view the ancestry.com page for reference #1 but AGF. Ancestry.com is allowed by WP:ELPEREN for official documents such as birth certificate
• I'm less forgiving on reference #2 - the reference quotes census but the link goes to Ancestry.com. Is it really necessary to state that "at some point he lived in Gallatin County, Montana"? Recommend to remove due to reliance on non WP:RS. The ksbf.org reference states that he moved to Topeka at an early age and Daily Gazette says Topeka was home since infancy.
• OK for usage of ancestry.com for marriage license for reference #4 and draft card for reference #5
• I can't view newspaper.com for reference #7 but AGF
• ksbf.org reference does not support "Bubb was the president of the United States Savings and Loan League from 1949 to 1950....and the University of Kansas (KU) Alumni Association " statements in career section
• "He was a member of.... (including as the board chairman)" not supported by New York Times reference and "the KU Athletic Board, and the Washburn University Board of Regents." not supported by KBHF ref.

• Plagiarism free:

• Earwing copyvio shows 12.3% - violation unlikely

Are we sure that this hook is interesting? It seems like quite a straightforward career progression. If he had started out as a casino dealer, that would be attention-grabbing. Surtsicna (talk) 16:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• It's not every clerk that reaches the level of business success that Bubb achieved. Is it the most interesting fact in the world? No. Are there more interesting facts in the article? Not really - maybe the fact that he received a distinguished service citation from the U.S. Treasury for World War II War Bonds. Am I willing to reject this submission because it is not the most interesting fact? No. Dwkaminski (talk) 15:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I've listed the review as maybe. See the comments above. No source given for loan clerk vs. clerk in the hook. Some other minor issues with sourcing that should be correctable. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dwkaminski (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Bsoyka: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 23:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 and Dwkaminski: The nominator hasn't been active since August. Is anyone willing to adopt the nomination? If not, the nomination may have to be closed as abandoned. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:05, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The nominator is not currently active (apparently due to education matters according to their userpage) and no one has adopted the nomination. With no progress on the horizon, it is regrettably time to close the nomination as stale. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:54, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that in Burlington's second election using ranked-choice voting, independent Bob Kiss was elected despite his opponent being preferred by over half the voters?
  • ALT0a:... that in Burlington's second election by ranked-choice voting, Bob Kiss was elected despite his opponent being preferred by a majority of voters?
• *ALT0b:... that in Alaska's first election by ranked-choice voting, Mary Peltola was elected despite her opponent Nick Begich being preferred by a majority of voters?
• ALT1a:... that candidates can win under ranked-choice voting, even if their opponent is preferred by more than half of all voters?
  • ALT1b:... that a candidate can win under ranked-choice voting even if their opponent is preferred by more than half of all voters?
• ALT2a:... that ranked-choice voting tends to favor extremists over consensus picks?
  • Reviewed:

Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 01:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• This is more of a comment than a review for now, but I have some reservations about the hook. For instance, the subject of the hook is Center squeeze, but the article is more about Burlington's second election. Unless you want to make it a double hook, I'm not sure if the current hook as written is appropriate or at least meets WP:DYKHOOKSTYLE regarding hooks being primarily about the subject. My suggestion would be to write a hook that's specifically about Center squeeze itself (perhaps something about its spoiler effect?), as opposed to a specific example. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, maybe? I'm a bit torn, since I feel like concrete examples make it easier to understand the topic. I've added some possible alternatives, though.– Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • ALT1a might have potential, but it's currently a WP:SEAOFBLUE and so may need to be fixed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fixed as best I could in Alt1b. I also added Alt0a, because I think an example of center squeeze is closely related (enough to satisfy the DYK guideline). I've also suggested the example of the AK special election, since I think it gets brought up in the lead of the article.– Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 15:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some formatting to the hooks which may or may not rectify your concerns.--Launchballer 12:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, the new hooks should work. Given how the hooks based on examples are not only specific but may require specialist knowledge, I've struck them. The nom is ready for a full review. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Closed Limelike Curves: There are huge amounts of unsourced content in this! Please fix them. When you've done that, I will give this a proper review.--Launchballer 11:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer: Fixed. – Closed Limelike Curves (talk) 00:57, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still see unsourced content.--Launchballer 07:42, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the "Super Saturn" exoplanet J1407b might actually turn out to be a free-floating planet or brown dwarf?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/White bear of Henry III
• Comment: The J1407b article was converted from redirect into article as a result of a split from the V1400 Centauri article. I began slowly expanding V1400 Centauri on 8 July 2024, but I did not add much to the J1407b section until 24 July 2024. As of today, it's been 5 days since I significantly expanded the J1407b section. Also, the image is optional; I'm fine whether it is used or not.

Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 20:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Comment: @Nrco0e: Hey, nice work on this article. I just took a look at your previous DYK entries, and this one is slightly different. Per WP:DYKHOOK, "The hook should include a definite fact that is unlikely to change, and citations in the article that are used to support the hook fact must verify the hook and be reliable." Do we know for a fact that J1407b might be a free-floating planet or a brown dwarf? It doesn't seem so. Your current version says it is not a brown dwarf. This hook also gives the impression of WP:CRYSTAL. What do you think? Can you come up with other hooks or do you personally believe this follows the rules? Viriditas (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Nrco0e: my guess is you are busy with school, but pinging you just in case that helps draw your attention by the weekend. Viriditas (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• @ජපස: I could use your guidance. Could you review my comments up above? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 22:26, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am actually okay with the hook. Brown dwarf seems to not be ruled out and the crucial word "might" makes it facilely correct whether or not it is actually this way or that! There is even a small chance that this thing is just an extremely eccentric orbit, though the chances of this are slim to none. :) jps (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ජපස: I'm with you. The problem is that the lead of the article currently says "Mamajek's team initially hypothesized that J1407b is an exoplanet or brown dwarf orbiting the star, but that has since been disfavored by later studies", so if we run this hook it will sound incorrect. Could you maybe take a look at the article when you have some time and make any necessary adjustments or propose a new hook? There's also the slight problem that DYK tends to favor hooks that consist of facts that don't change. Thanks, and there's no hurry on any of this. Viriditas (talk) 22:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you mean because someone might think get confused and think the brown dwarf was not free-floating? It is the orbit that is disfavored as opposed to the identification of the object's planet vs. brown dwarf status. jps (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Any way to clarify that? Viriditas (talk) 22:50, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

... that when J1407b (which is either an exoplanet or brown dwarf) was discovered, it was thought likely to be orbiting the star V1400 Centauri, but current evidence implies it is more likely free-floating? jps (talk) 23:02, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ජපස and Viriditas: Hi, yes, I've been really busy with school and other personal matters, so I apologize for the delay. jps, I think your hook is good, but I think it needs to mention that J1407b has a disk/ring system, since that is what J1407b is most known for. In that case, perhaps you can say this below?

... that when J1407b (a ringed exoplanet or brown dwarf) was discovered, it was thought to be orbiting the star V1400 Centauri, but current evidence implies it is more likely free-floating?

I feel like that the parenthetical part of this hook can be eliminated to make it more concise (i.e. say "when the ringed exoplanet or brown dwarf J1407b was discovered"), but I'm not sure if it flows any better, so I'd like to hear what you two think. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 00:44, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, this is what we call the "riffing" stage. Parentheticals aren’t really allowed in hooks. Viriditas (talk) 01:09, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should stick with one or the other. Personally, if I had to choose, I would not say anything about the rings/disk. The lack of a repeated transit is more interesting. But, alternatively, you could say something like "... that J1407b is either a brown dwarf with a protoplanetary disk or a ringed exoplanet." jps (talk) 01:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding below. Please change or add as necessary. Viriditas (talk) 21:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note, the proposed caption for the image is likely too long and needs to be trimmed. Viriditas (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Viriditas: I'm leaning towards ALT1. The lede of the J1407b article states it is a substellar object (an umbrella term including exoplanets and brown dwarfs), so I think ALT2 would be confusing to the layman. I did change the wording of ALT2 for clarity since the original sounded like J1407b had either a disk or ringed exoplanet, although it still doesn't resolve this aforementioned issue. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 23:00, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Can you please trim the lead image caption? I don't think they will allow a long caption like that. Viriditas (talk) 23:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Viriditas: How short does the caption have to be? Would "Illustration of a brown dwarf surrounded by a protoplanetary disk" be enough or does that caption sound too unrelated to the subject? If the latter is an issue, would it work to include "like J1407b" somewhere in the caption? Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 23:11, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, but "Illustration of a brown dwarf surrounded by a protoplanetary disk" sounds perfect to me, and if there's a problem, others will deal with it. Even better would be "Illus. of a brown dwarf surrounded by a protoplanetary disk" but I don't know if that's gospel. Viriditas (talk) 23:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, I've changed the caption. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 23:30, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Nrco0e and ජපස: Earwig doesn't like this: Mark J. Pecaut, a then-graduate student under the supervision of Eric E. Mamajek at the University of Rochester discovered... Can you paraphrase and reword? Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 01:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Seems like excessive detail to me. The names of discoverers are also a bit of a throwback. Unless there was much mention in the media or something about attributing the discovery, it devalues the team nature of how science is actually done. jps (talk) 10:48, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Good point. I will look during my second read through. Do you think the lead section is too dense for the general reader? I know the body is, but it's not too difficult to get through. My only issue is that some of it was kind of boring and I thought the prose could be a touch more exciting particularly in terms of summarizing each section in the first sentence, so the reader knows what's coming and is prepared for the details. I would like to close this soon so I'm going to try and expedite this review. Has everyone chosen the best hook? Viriditas (talk) 20:12, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @ජපස: Can you clarify what you mean by "devalues the team nature of how science is actually done"? I mention Pecaut and Mamajek in the article because that's what Kenworthy says in his website (ref 8). Other news sources from 2012 explicitly say Pecaut and Mamajek discovered the eclipse.[2][3] I mention the other collaborators of Pecaut and Mamajek in the sentences about the conference and journal paper because that's where they first appear in. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 17:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh, don't read too much into it. The game is to attribute to one or two people these sorts of discoveries, but we stand on the shoulders of giants. I don't object to you identifying these two as the discoverers. For our purposes, they are. It's just that discovery provenance is caught up in a lot of problematic narratives associated with science, "discovery", and the like. In any case, it's not that big of a deal. Just a thought that perhaps we don't necessarily need to mention who discovered it in a hook. jps (talk) 17:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ah, alright. Thanks for clearing it up.Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 17:31, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @ජපස: I don't think I'd vote for any hook that mentions the discoverers, and none of the proposed hooks do, so that's kind of a moot point. I suggest we move discussions about the general ethics of science to somewhere else (this thread is getting long enough by itself). Renerpho (talk) 03:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Viriditas: Reworded the sentence. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 17:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Lead: It was first detected by telescopes of the Super Wide Angle Search for Planets (SuperWASP) and All Sky Automated Survey (ASAS) projects in April–June 2007. Any reason to include the "April-June" part and just say 2007 instead? Works better for the reader, and there's no reason to know the months here, is there? Viriditas (talk) 02:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Astronomers Mark Pecaut and Eric Mamajek Do we really need a link to astronomers here? Viriditas (talk) 02:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I would say "no". jps (talk) 10:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I changed it to "team of astronomers". @ජපස: I was just looking at various versions of this subject on other language projects. What I found interesting is how different sites treat the subject. For example, at es, the authors write "J1407b is probably a brown dwarf that is not gravitationally attracted by a star", whereas we take a more ambiguous POV. Just wondering what you think of this. Another thing I've noticed is that the other sites are also very easy to read and understand, whereas this article has somewhat unnecessarily complex and confusing language that talks around the subject rather than just directly stating the knowns and unknowns. Viriditas (talk) 21:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ALT1 seems fine to me. The Spanish article is simpler, at the expense of being wrong (working with an outdated mass estimate in the lede). I appreciate the English version for being thorough, and more careful with keeping apart the different hypothesis. Yes, that makes the article more complex, but I'll prefer that to an oversimplification any day. That said, I also agree that the lede can be made simpler and more concise without losing much. Renerpho (talk) 06:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Agreed. I'm still standing with ALT1 as I have mentioned earlier. And yes, the other language Wikipedia articles on J1407b are outdated and have not been edited and updated as thoroughly as what I have done to the English article. I personally don't think using these other language Wikipedia articles is really a clear-cut way of qualifying the article. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 17:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @ජපස and Nrco0e: I've been reading our project pages on the same topic and they basically all share one thing in common that is different from this page. They generalize in the lead and present just the bare facts, and I think that's missing here. We have to assume that most of our readers are not astronomers and astrophysicists. For example, I still find this statement confusing based on the way it is written: "Mamajek's team initially hypothesized that J1407b is an exoplanet or brown dwarf orbiting the star, but that has since been disfavored by later studies". We don't even need to go into all of that. Just fix the lead so that first sentence states right away at the beginning that J1407b is either an an exoplanet or brown dwarf that is likely a free-floating object. Then, from there, once the reader understands what exactly it is they are reading, you can go into the nitty gritty. I have read this six times and I still think the lead is too detailed, particularly in the first paragraph. Give us a dumbed down first paragraph, and I think you should be fine slowly introducing the reader to more details. Viriditas (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about this for the lede section?

J1407b is a substellar object, possibly a free-floating planet, with a massive ring system or circumplanetary disk. It was first detected in 2007 when its rings eclipsed the star V1400 Centauri, causing a series of dimming events for 56 days. J1407b's rings span a radius of about 90 million kilometers (56 million miles) and may eventually form moons over time. Although initially thought to be orbiting V1400 Centauri, later studies suggest J1407b is likely an unbound object passing in front of the star.

This is stripped down to what I think is the bare minimum. Everything else can (and is) handled in the article body. The Spanish Wikipedia article adds a mass estimate, but I think that's not essential (not to mention that it's a bit tricky, and the Spanish version gets it wrong). Renerpho (talk) 07:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and replaced the lede. Renerpho (talk) 07:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ALT1: ... that when J1407b was discovered, it was thought to be orbiting the star V1400 Centauri, but current evidence implies it is more likely free-floating?
• ALT2: ... that J1407b is either a brown dwarf with a protoplanetary disk or an exoplanet with a massive ring system?
• ALT3: ... that the "Super Saturn" exoplanet J1407b might turn out to be a free-floating planet or brown dwarf?

Review

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Still need to choose a hook. What is the preference of the nom (and others), based on ALT1, ALT2, and ALT3? I would like to see the readable prose in the lead tightened up a bit, but this is not a requirement for DYK, but I do find the lead section less than ideal for general readers per my comments up above. Viriditas (talk) 21:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, everyone, I tried to close the deal, but with nobody responding or too busy, I’m afraid my time has run out. I’m going on vacation for the next month. I will put in a request for a second look on the main page. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 05:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The lede has been replaced. I hope someone picks this up for review! Renerpho (talk) 07:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Renerpho: Lede's fine for DYK, you'll want to expand it for GA. (WP:LEADLENGTH is as useless as a chocolate teapot but my personal rule of thumb is about one sentence per paragraph.) Not sure I like any of the hooks (WP:DYKDEFINITE doesn't like 'current'/'either'/'might'); I propose ALT4: ... that J1407b caused a series of significant dimming events between 7 April and 4 June 2007?--Launchballer 09:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nrco0e: Thought Renerpho was the nominator.--Launchballer 09:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the Battle of Tinzaouaten likely saw the Wagner Group's largest death toll in Mali since its deployment there in 2021?

• ALT1: ... that Ukraine's Main Directorate of Intelligence said that it provided Tuareg rebels assistance that enabled their victory in a battle against Wagner Group mercenaries in Mali?

• Reviewed:

Chomik! (talk?) 17:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• @Chomik: can you pick a hook that's more definitive? "Likely" sounds ambiguous and usually requires attribution.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 14:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Vice regent: most sources agree that this was the Wagner Group's biggest loss in Mali ([4] [5] [6]) but I'm not sure if it would be acceptable to remove the word "likely" since there's no confirmed death toll. If not, I could change the hook to be about Ukraine's involvement. Chomik! (talk?) 14:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the toll is not confirmed best not to use it as a hook. Ukraine's involvement does sound more interesting.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 16:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vice regent: added an alt hook about Ukraine. Chomik! (talk?) 17:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good as it is. I would prefer "that Ukraine said it provided Tuareg rebels with assistance in their successful ambush of Wagner Group mercenaries in Mali?" As I said on talk this was more of an ambush. But I think your alt is fine too.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 22:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Full review needed. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:59, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will take, probably tomorrow. For now, striking ALT0.--Launchballer 14:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Chomik1129: Long enough, new enough. No copyright concerns, no maintenance templates deserved, no QPQ needed. The hook does not meet WP:DYKINT - please propose a hook that is unusual or intriguing to a broad audience.--Launchballer 07:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Chlöe Swarbrick won the race for Auckland Central in the 2020 New Zealand general election, the first time a Green candidate had won an electorate without major party endorsement?

• Reviewed:

TheLoyalOrder (talk) 10:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Reviewing this. On first look, the "Declined" section has to have a ref. I suppose the "Declared" section does not need a separate ref as those are the same people in the "Results" section but other people may think otherwise. In the "Background" section, the background ref has to have a ref on electoral system. Full review to come later. Howard the Duck (talk) 04:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kia ora, I have done the things in this comment.TheLoyalOrder (talk) 09:50, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unfortunately, due to unforeseen personal circumstances, I won't be able to continue the review. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hi, I'd be interested in taking over this review if needed @Howard the Duck:. Ornithoptera (talk) 07:28, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sure, no worries! Howard the Duck (talk) 11:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Full review needed; Ornithoptera, are you still interested in doing one? BlueMoonset (talk) 10:28, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi, my apologies BlueMoonset, been away from Wiki a bit due to a loss in the family. Since things have winded down, I'll try and look at the article later this week. Apologies for any inconvenience caused. Ornithoptera (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ornithoptera: This is the second oldest fully unreviewed nom and I unexpectedly need a second QPQ (ironically for Gigi Perez, who went viral for a song about her late sister!). Do you still plan on reviewing this or should I take over, probably tomorrow?--Launchballer 14:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Launchballer, it seems like you needed a second QPQ so you're more than welcome to take over, my apologies for the delay. The loss in the family has affected a lot of my concentration more than I would have expected as of late. Cheers Ornithoptera (talk) 21:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheLoyalOrder: I've tried to review this a few times, but I can't get past the fact that the Background section goes into way too much detail for a daughter article (to give one example out of several, content about the electorate should be at Auckland Central). Please cut this right down. When you've done that, I'll try again.--Launchballer 10:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Codex Basiliensis A. N. IV. 1, a manuscript of the New Testament, was marked with red chalk for it to be used as a page-template for the first published printed edition of the New Testament?

• Reviewed:

Stephen Walch (talk) 20:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• The hook as currently written may be too specialist for general readers; as in, it may be hard to understand for those unfamiliar with the relevant fields (in this case, Biblical studies). The hook fact itself might still have potential, it's just that the hook probably needs rephrasing. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 14:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  How about:

that a manuscript of the New Testament called Codex Basiliensis A. N. IV. 1, was used as a page-template for the first published printed edition of the New Testament by its editor, Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus?

Or:

that Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus used Codex Basiliensis A. N. IV. 1 as a page template for his first published printed edition of the New Testament, marking it with red chalk?

Want to try and get a mention of the red-chalk marks in if possible :D Stephen Walch (talk) 14:57, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still think the hook is rather specialist or too reliant on being familiar with Biblical studies. I'm not sure who else to ask for help with, so I'll see if I can ask for help over at WT:DYK regarding a hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot grasp the importance of the red chalk from either the hook or the article. From the article, red chalk was used to mark changes, by one or more people. What makes this so unusual that it is worth mentioning in the hook? Did texts not often get changes, or is there something unusual about the material? CMD (talk) 10:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Chipmunkdavis - Ancient manuscripts aren't usually written on or marked up by anyone these days: the idea that someone would mark or deface an artefact fills most modern people with dread; that a written manuscript of the NT was, to quote Scrivener, "barbarously scored with red chalk" is quite telling of this even from the 19th century. The MS and how it was used is also very important in the history of printed books, as this was the manuscript used for the first ever published printed Greek NT. Evidently I need to think of a how to word the hook to get this across. :) Stephen Walch (talk) 14:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Stephen Walch: Heads up, "New Testament" is a WP:COMMONTERM, so you could probably get away with starting ALT0 at "a manuscript of the New Testament". I'd also lose everything after "template" for interest purposes and replace "it to be used as a page-" with "use as a" for concision. This should simplify the hook somewhat and give you some room to put a quote in there.--Launchballer 11:20, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer:: thanks very much for the suggested improvements. How about then:

• ...that a manuscript of the New Testament was "barbarous scored with red chalk" when used as a page-template for the first published printed edition of the New Testament?
• Source: Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose; Edward Miller (1894). A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament. Vol. 1 (4th ed.). London: George Bell & Sons. p. 191.

Think that works as a decent hook? :) Stephen Walch (talk) 19:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's better, but I think it's recursive to include "New Testament" twice and that the hook would be more interesting if it left off what it was being used for.--Launchballer 20:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that a viral dance for Charli XCX's "Apple", in which performers mimic driving a car, was performed by #Amishtiktok content creators? Source: https://www.theguardian.com/music/article/2024/jul/28/apple-dance-charli-xcx-brat-tiktok
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Birthday of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman

Launchballer 10:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I can't escape this damn album... well let me review what you've got :)

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall:

• I know many Amish families famously disavow all modern forms of technology (though as with any religion there is internal diversity), so there is potential here. However, some tweaking can be done, removing a couple of unnecessary information. Do we need to specify the title of the song, or the platform where the dance went viral? Wrt the article itself, I have some concerns - what makes neonmusic.com, Resident Advisor, and Whynow RS? Furthermore, the article uses two student newspapers. Once these are addressed, I will be glad to look at the hook again. Elias / PSA 🏕️🪐 ^{[please make some noise]} 05:44, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neonmusic has a proper editorial structure in place, so I'm inclined to trust it. The rest are all attributed opinion. (Whynow and Resident Advisor don't put theirs on their website, however google tells me they both have editors.) Student media "can sometimes be considered reliable on other topics". ALT0a: ... that a viral dance in which performers mimic driving a car was performed by Amish content creators?--Launchballer 07:04, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer, RSSM also says that "professional sources are typically preferred when available." Surely given the big cultural moment Brat is going through, there are more reliable, professional reviews you can use to replace those student publications. Wrt hook, I would highlight that it was a viral dance from the Internet: perhaps ALT0b: ...that some of the many participants of a recent Internet dance challenge were Amish people? Elias / PSA 🏕️🪐 ^{[please make some noise]} 08:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that existence of other coverage has any bearing on whether the student publications should be included. For what they're being used for, i.e. attributed opinion, they're fine. You're right that there is lots of extra coverage of Brat, however Apple wasn't released as a single until very recently and all of the critical reception predates the song going viral, so there's much less of it than you'd think. Surprisingly few critics mentioned it as a highlight. (Much of the coverage went on some of the tracks that actually were singles; most of the hits for ""charli xcx" brat review apple" include phrases like "Apple Music" and "Fiona Apple".) I've added one more WP:EXPERTSPS which I missed when I looked the first time. (You'd need a second reviewer for ALT0b as neither of my hooks mention when the track was released, and I'm tempted to ask them about this as well.)--Launchballer 08:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see @Ss112: has removed the student reviews. I don't agree with their removal, but I don't feel strongly enough to put them back.--Launchballer 05:17, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PSA: Does the above address your concerns, and is this approved? If not, what else needs to be done? Z1720 (talk) 19:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Z1720 @Launchballer, sorry that I left this in the backburner for quite a while - school had just started and I had to stay away from editing for a bit to keep focus. Now that I'm freer these days though, I looked at the article again and am glad to see the critical reception has been changed to reflect the comments. On that end, it LGTM, but since I proposed another hook myself I might need to get a second opinion . Elias / PSA 🏕️🪐 ^{[please make some noise]} 02:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fairly sure a new reviewer is only needed where new information is added and that ALT0b is a rewording of ALT0, so you could in theory approve it.--Launchballer 11:58, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• New reviewer needed; the various ALT0 hooks are different enough that an independent review is warranted. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• New reviewer here, Alt0b doesn't seem like it presents the interest here in my opinion given I'm sure Amish content creators do other dances as well; I'd say a slightly different form of Alt0a, Alt0c: "... that a viral dance in which performers mimic driving a car was performed by Amish content creators, who substituted operating a horse?"? (134 chars) That seems like the most interesting part to me. Hopefully another new reviewer is not needed now. Mrfoogles (talk) 04:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That hook is fine by me. (The "unusual or intriguing" bit is in "Amish people have participated in an Internet dance challenge", as the Amish notoriously steer clear of technology.)--Launchballer 06:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• New reviewer needed for ALT0c; the horse is a new fact and should be checked by someone other than Mrfoogles, who proposed the hook. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:14, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that during most of the Rabbinic period, starting in the aftermath of the Bar Kokhba revolt, the center of Jewish life in the Eastern Mediterranean shifted from the now-destroyed Judea to the Galilee?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations

Dovidroth (talk) 10:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

•  Reviewing... Flibirigit (talk) 17:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - ?
• Interesting: - ?

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: The article was created on August 1, and nominated within seven days. It is long enough and subsequently expanded significantly by User:Mariamnei, so I have added a DYKmake credit accordingly. The article meets sourcing requirements, and is neutral in tone. All of the images used in the article have a free license on the Commons. The nominated picture is clear at a low resolution, and used in the article, but I am unsure of its relevance since the hook is not worded correctly with (pictured) or similar. Please explicity mention how the picture is related to the hook. As for the hook, I'm not sure exactly where it is cited in the article. It seems more like a general overview of the article, rather than any specific point being cited. QPQ is not required for a new nominator. The article is a welcome contribution to Wikipedia, but this nominaton needs some attention to the hook to be promoted to DYK. Flibirigit (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Flibirigit for your review. Here in an alternate hook that I hope will work better with the requirements you mentioned:

• ALT1 ... that the Bar Kokhba revolt ultimately failed and resulted in many Jewish casualties, a general economic downturn and a prohibition on the residence of Jews in Jerusalem and its surrounding area. However, this prohibition was not always enforced, and there appears to have been a small Jewish community in Jerusalem towards the end of the second century.

Sources: Goodman, M. (2000) ‘Judaea’, in A.K. Bowman, P. Garnsey, and D. Rathbone (eds.) The Cambridge Ancient History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (The Cambridge Ancient History), pp. 664–678 (Source for first sentence) and S. Safrai, The Holy Assembly of Jerusalem, in Zion 4 (1957), pages 183-193 (Hebrew) (Source for second sentence).

In terms of the image, perhaps we can use the lead image currently in the article:

Please let me know if that works. Dovidroth (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The proposed hook ALT1 is well beyond the 200-character limit. Please see WP:DYKCRIT for guidelines. If needed, I can seek assistance from others to help you propose hooks. Flibirigit (talk) 15:58, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Kayangan Lake, located in Coron Island, is regarded as the cleanest lake in Asia?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Oedipus (opera)
• Comment: Gained permission to nom this by DarkNight0917.

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I will do a full review of this later, but for now my main concern is the hook. The claim of it being the cleanest lake in Asia is an exceptional claim, so per WP:DYKHOOK and WP:EXCEPTIONAL would require exceptional sourcing. Right now the article uses The Straits Times as the source for the fact: it is yellow on WP:RSP, which generally means it is to be used with caution on Wikipedia, and its suitability is a case-by-case thing. In this case, it may not be completely safe for it to be what supports the source. Either more independent or stronger sourcing should be found, or a different hook be proposed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, propose this one: ALT1:... that a tribe performed rituals in a lake to let outsiders use it? Source:TST this hook uses the Straits times, let me know if it's okay or not. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 12:36, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ALT1 should be okay as the article isn't about the Singaporean government and there's no reason to doubt that the ST is unreliable in this case. The main issue right now is that part of the article appears to be a close paraphrase of the Straits Times article, so that needs urgent attention. The sourcing in the article isn't the best since it seems to rely on tourist guide websites, but for the purpose of the article it probably isn't disqualifying since they aren't used to support contentious information. As for the rest of the DYK checks, the article is new enough and long enough and a QPQ has been provided. In addition for the need to resolve the close paraphrasing, the article could also use a copyedit. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:05, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One final suggestion: as the claim of it being the cleanest lake in Asia is an exceptional claim, and I do not believe that the sources provided are exceptional sources, my suggestion would be to make the statement in the article less definitive. Something like "The Straits Times stated that the lake is reputed..." or wording to that effect. Maybe Launchballer can help out here with the wording and copyediting? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:58, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A possible alternate wording of ALT1, if for whatever reason it does not pass scrutiny, could be something like:

ALT3 ... that prior to allowing outsiders to visit Kayangan Lake, the Tagbanwa tribe performed a ritual to seek permission from nature spirits?

It's much longer than ALT2 and I think ALT2 is still suitable, this is just a backup option. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:01, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will take a look at this when I'm done with Talk:Megan Barton-Hanson/GA1, and I'll get to that when I'm feeling a little more clear-headed. (There's clearly something big there I'm not seeing.)--Launchballer 13:48, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am really not liking some of the sources used in this article - Journey Era, Philippinetravels.ph, and Richandsunnytravels.ph are all WP:SPS blogs and Guidetothephilippines.ph is a travel agency. What makes them reliable?--Launchballer 14:45, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They're travel websites that give information about the subject. They aren't ideal, but it's often the case that coverage about less well-known Philippine destinations are lacking. As long as they aren't being used to support contentious information, as in what they're saying is uncontroversial and unlikely to be made up, I don't necessarily see them as a problem for DYK purposes. This isn't aiming for FA or even GA. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:08, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having said that, the claim of it being the cleanest lake in Asia is an exceptional claim, and I'm not comfortable with how it is currently presented as a fact in the article. As stated above, my suggestion would be for it to be attributed to the Straits Times, while also making the presentation less definite. If this isn't addressed, I can't see this article running on DYK since that statement will likely be challenged at WT:DYK and/or WP:ERRORS. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:57, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer: Please address the concerns raised above; the nomination may be marked for closure if they are not resolved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, added note. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 13:55, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but the attribution to The Straits Times has to be in-text and not a footnote. So the article should say something like "A The Straits Times article called the lake the cleanest in Asia." or something like that, and even, I'm not even sure if the claim would meet scrutiny to other editors. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer and Narutolovehinata5: "Asia's cleanest lake" is a scientific claim, and not one The Straits Times is qualified to make. What even defines "cleanest"? "widely regarded" by scientists, or average people, or who? Hook currently fails verification. Also, are the travel blogs reliable sources? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see this came up earlier. Launchballer seems to be right under WP:DYKG, which says that all sources cited need to meet a minimum standard of reliability (i.e. can't be self-published). theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that buses in Oxford accounted for as much as 80% of pollution in the city centre before the low emission zone was launched in 2014?

• Reviewed:
• Comment: Should be good as this article is just above 1500 characters. My third article.

JuniperChill (talk) 08:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Not a review, but there was an excellent piece in Roads.org.uk that talks about this. I'll leave it to you to decide whether he constitutes an WP:EXPERTSPS or not.--Launchballer 09:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah yes, I never thought about reading that article. It's very useful for readers. I have heard of roads.org.uk but never thought about them publishing a ZEZ article. JuniperChill (talk) 11:43, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to do something about the unsourced content in this. (I don't plan on reviewing this any time soon as I review oldest first, but I might pop in and expand it once I've finished the stuff on my to-do list.)--Launchballer 12:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JuniperChill: Not a full review, but I have tagged the article with two "citation needed" tags. These need to be resolved before this nomination can be approved. Z1720 (talk) 03:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: I added two references to replace the {{cn}}. Should be good JuniperChill (talk) 09:38, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I have modified the hook for what happened after buses accounted for up to 80%. JuniperChill (talk) 15:17, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This needs a reviewer to look at all the criteria. Z1720 (talk) 11:56, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JuniperChill: Was about to review, however I see that the phrase "nine streets in Oxford" is in the lead but not in the body and sourced nowhere. This should be rectified.--Launchballer 18:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer: Done with the citations. However, the "nine streets" already appeared on both the lead and the body. diff JuniperChill (talk) 22:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my mistake. (You can actually remove the ref from the lead if you like, since it isn't actually necessary.) I will review this in the morning.--Launchballer 22:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the Asik-Asik Falls (pictured) were accidentally discovered?

• ALT1: ... that the Asik-Asik Falls (pictured) became viral after its discovery? Source: INQUIRER-2
• ALT2: ... that a picture of the Asik-Asik Falls (pictured) won a picture contest? Source: INQUIRER-2
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kimi wa Bara yori Utsukushī
• Comment: Accepted by the author.

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 09:05, 6 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Here are some more alt hooks:
  • ALT3: ... that you can't see what feeds the Asik-Asik Falls (pictured)? Source: INQUIRER-2
  • ALT4: ... the Asik-Asik Falls (pictured) aren't fed by a visible source? Source: INQUIRER-2

These are kind of what the falls are really known for, so I think that these would be more interesting. - DarkNight0917 (talk / contr) 23:57, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

new enough, long enough, image is fine, qpq done. some concerns:

• on the verge of rejecting alt0; to discover something, by definition, has to be an accident.

• rejecting alt1; not mentioned in article. also, readers won't know what it means for a waterfall to go viral. it was an image of the falls that went viral, and that's uninteresting, a lot of things go viral.

• rejecting alt2; uninteresting (and probably undue to mention in the article).

• alt3/4's source says that Where the water comes from is still a mystery. it's not visible, yes, but it's also not known, unless there's something i'm missing.

• refs 2, 3, and 7 are travel guides/blogs; are these reliable?

• It receives over 500 tourists on weekdays and 1,000 on weekends is cited to a 2014 source and probably outdated

ltbdl☃ (talk) 07:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know what's wrong with alt3 and 4, the blogs are reliable since these are usually for expansion and regularly do no harm in DYK. Fixed the outdated thing by adding a note. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 13:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer: regularly do no harm? do you have examples? ltbdl☃ (talk) 17:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TheNuggeteer: If the article cites blogs with no kind of peer review or editorial process, ltbdl is right that those should be removed before appearing at DYK. Could that be addressed? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that liberalism in the Philippines was mostly used during revolutions?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Begüm Pusat

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:36, 7 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• @TheNuggeteer: There are multiple {{page needed}} tags on this article. Please rectify them.--Launchballer 23:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Done. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 00:16, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Long enough, new enough. QPQ done. Earwig highlights a couple of phrases, but I can't think of another way of wording them so calling WP:LIMITED. I think the {{improve categories}} template should be resolved. Could you talk me through the sourcing for the hook?--Launchballer 23:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the improve categories tag, what do you need? 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 03:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing where in the article the hook is spelt out, unless I'm going blind.--Launchballer 09:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Philippine revolution and martial law, which both signify the ideology was used in revolutions. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that at 193 centimetres (6 ft 4 in) tall, Australian Olympic water polo player Sienna Green is the tallest person in her family?

• Reviewed: National Hospital Service Reserve
• Comment: Nominated on behalf of an IP editor who will (as usual) provide the QPQ.

Schwede66 11:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Update: QPQ now added (just so that it doesn't get overlooked). Schwede66 23:47, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any better hook than this? Being that tall isn't always uncommon depending on where you're from. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Schwede66: Pinging for possible additional hooks. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see a better hook than that. If we don't hear from 2603:7000:2101:AA00:5DFC:4931:AA8F:8FB5 within a few days, I suggest you close that. Schwede66 00:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With no response from the IP and Schwede66 being open to a closure, it unfortunately seems that the article is not a good fit for DYK at this time given the lack of hooky material. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:33, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll give it some thought. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:D919:443A:176C:AE5B (talk) 07:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I've been musing about the concern that "Being that tall isn't always uncommon depending on where you're from." So I thought I would check.

While I'm not sure what "uncommon" is meant to be in that comment, this site indicates that a 6' 4" woman in Australia would be in the "Extremely Tall 99.999 Percentile". (By way of comparison, our article (for what it is worth) suggests that the average Australian woman 18+ a dozen years ago was a foot or so shorter[9] (N.B. - it also indicates that Australian women are among the tallest 20% in the world).)

She's also 19. Of US women at that age (wrong country, but according to our article, US women are a bit taller than Australian women), that would put her in the 99.9% percentile.

Not that we need more. But the hook does not simply reflect her height - which does given the above appear to be very much uncommon. But points to the fact that she is the tallest in her family. Lmk if you want me to look for evidence that it is, in addition, not common for a 19 year old girl to be the tallest in her family. There are studies that touch on the issue of a child's height relating to the parents' height, as well as there being a marked sex difference in height with women tending to be shorter than men,[10] but I haven't taken the time to find the best one, as I suspect what I've detailed may perhaps suffice.

All-in-all, I think that the assumption that led to the hook being rejected isn't in line with the evidence. Many thanks. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:F804:C954:1D4C:5D11 (talk) 03:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that simply being the tallest in one's family is not by itself a hooky fact. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is not. But that ignores your original complaint above - which is what I've addressed directly above. You wrote: "Being that tall isn't always uncommon". I tend to think that being in the 99.999 percentile might, just perhaps, qualify as uncommon.

And, of course, the hook speaks to that fact, as well as the fact that she is the tallest in her family... it's clearly not, as you now suggest, only about her being the tallest in her family. I'm a but confused by your most recent comment. 2603:7000:2101:AA00:A13D:8F1E:26A2:8F66 (talk) 05:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that an early Polish cyberpunk short story, "CyberJoly Drim" from 1998, aroused a significant controversy in the Polish science fiction and fantasy community? Source: https://ejournals.eu/pliki_artykulu_czasopisma/pelny_tekst/3d32c44d-af77-4c7d-9404-a10a190a3a2c/pobierz
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Samsung and unions

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:49, 5 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• ... that that the electrification of the Midland Main Line north of Kettering was revived in December 2021 after being paused in 2015, then scrapped in July 2017?

• ALT1: ... that the Midland Main Line electrification project is going at a "snail's pace"? Source: https://westbridgfordwire.com/midland-mainline-electrification-by-2030-in-government-plans/
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Azahriah
• Comment: My fifth nomination and I need a QPQ for the first time. Luckily, I did that a few months ago. Also, my first GA article, though I didn't make that

JuniperChill (talk) 20:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• What's surprising or interesting about this hook? "Infrastructure project delayed" is not surprising anywhere in the world, especially an Anglophone country. (t · c) buidhe 04:55, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hopefully this is more interesting, but idk if the wording is the best.

• • • Alt2: "that when the Midland Main Line was first electrified in the 1980s between London and Bedford, driver-only operation was introduced, leading to industrial dispute?" JuniperChill (talk) 18:03, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Drive-by ALT3: ... that although the electrification of the Midland Main Line was designated high priority in 1981, work to electrify the northern part of the line did not begin until over 30 years later? Kimikel (talk) 02:18, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Kimikel: Remember that the section of the MML south of Bedford was electrified in the 80s. However, north of Bedford, it remained unelectrified until 2019, and it only extends to just south of Leicester, formerly Kettering until July 2024. So maybe adding "north of Bedford" would make more sense. JuniperChill (talk) 10:34, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thanks for the correction, just clarified. Kimikel (talk) 21:47, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Clay Webb was named in a lawsuit concerning bullying that occurred when he was in high school?

• ALT1: ... that Clay Webb once allegedly encouraged a minor to drink a bottle filled with Webb's semen? Source: ^[2]
• Reviewed:
• Comment: I think the secondary hook grabs your attention more, but I can understand if it is denied because of the vulgar nature concerning it.

TarheelBornBred (talk) 13:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• ALT1 definitely breaches WP:DYKHOOKBLP, probably ALT0 also, and I'd question the WP:DUEness of that entire section per WP:SUSPECT.--Launchballer 22:16, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TarheelBornBred: This needs a new hook.--Launchballer 22:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Maybe ALT2: ... that Clay Webb, a five-star recruit from the class of 2019, was named a preseason All-American in 2024? ^[3] The interesting nature being that it took him from 2019 to 2024 which is an abnormally long stretch of time in college football already. Truthfully, I had the original hook in mind as the main selling point, but I can understand why it won't work. TarheelBornBred (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Full review needed.--Launchballer 19:39, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TarheelBornBred: More of a comment for now rather than a review, but the issue with ALT2 is that it might not meet WP:DYKINT. A reader unfamiliar with college football and its intricacies may not get what "five-star recruit" and "All-American" are, especially if they are outside of America like the majority of readers. Ideally, a hook should be as understandable to as many people as possible without requiring too much context, and I don't think the hook meets that. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I have struck the original hook as the parts about the bullying are no longer in the article. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@TarheelBornBred: Please address the above.--Launchballer 20:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this totally slipped my mind. Maybe to make it more understandable to readers unfamiliar with college football, the hook could be ALT 3: ...that Clay Webb, a top recruit for the college football class of 2019, was named a preseason candidate for a team of the best college football players in 2024? In my opinion this hook sounds a little more clear to those who might not understand college football. TarheelBornBred (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC).[reply]

It's more understandable, but probably still too technical for general readers. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that following a string of scandals, the contestants on the twenty second series of the BBC One celebrity dancing competition Strictly Come Dancing included a locum GP (pictured)? Source: https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/views/regulation/new-sessionals-welcome-on-board/ for 'locum'; https://news.sky.com/story/strictly-come-dancing-2024-go-compare-singer-wynne-evans-joins-line-up-13191912 for everything else
  • ALT1: ... that Dr Punam Krishan (pictured) "learned the hard way to live without patient ‘satisfaction’"? Source: https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/views/regulation/ive-learned-the-hard-way-to-live-without-patient-satisfaction/
    • ALT1a: ... that Dr Punam Krishan (pictured) "learned the hard way to live without patient 'satisfaction'"?
  • ALT2: ... that Dr Punam Krishan (pictured) was raised on curry and Irn-Bru? Source: https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17800808.dr-punam-krishan-reality-life-scottish-gp/
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Chand Sifarish
  • Comment: The contestants for this show are being drip-fed, so I may add articles to this if anyone else lacks an article. (Update August 12: Lineup complete. Shame actually, there were rumours that Sunil Patel might have participated and he's a cryptoentrepreneur.) I'd suggest running this on the day the series starts, probably the 21st of September. (Update 30 August: 14th September, as they're running a special programme at the end of the series.)

Launchballer 11:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I didn't know what a "locum GP" is. Maybe that's a good thing, as it makes the first hook more "hooky". But can you clarify that in the lead of the article? Eg you can write "is a Scottish locum general practitioner (GP) from Glasgow." Also, in "Early life and medical career" please also clarify what's a "locum"? Might be helpful to link to Locum#United Kingdom healthcare.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 13:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• We have a (somewhat execrable) article about what locum GPs are at sessional GP, a term I've never heard of. I've made some edits to the article.--Launchballer 19:11, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The original hook is problematic: there's an implied cause and effect—because of the scandals, they've brought in a locum GP—that is nothing of the sort. So I think the special occasion request will need to drop as well. You'll need to fix the single quote marks in ALT1; curly punctuation is against the MOS on Wikipedia. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed ALT1a above. I'm guessing that "the Strictly Come Dancing contestant" would qualify for WP:DYKTRIM, right?--Launchballer 00:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Ajah Pritchard-Lolo is Vanuatu's first Olympic weightlifter?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Cooper Mays

BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• @BeanieFan11: Please provide a QPQ as, per the ongoing discussion, consensus is leaning towards making QPQs mandatory at the time of the nomination and noms without QPQs may be closed without warning. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Full review needed now that QPQ has been provided.--Launchballer 20:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Mokulubete Makatisi placed eighth at the Commonwealth Games in the marathon while running in shoes she had never worn before?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/William Aitken (architect) (2/4)

BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

•  Doing... ミラP@Miraclepine 15:45, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing: - "She competed in the Maputo All-Africa Games in 2011" doesn't seem to be supported by ref 1, so use ref 2 for that (go to statistics -> results -> 2011). Page says 1:09:45 but ref 6 says 1:09:44. No other issues though.
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting: - Should clarify something like how late these shoes were and/or how much they're needed for running, but no other issues.

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Nom one week after creation and size 2330 B. Ref 4 ad 6 is broken, so I used [11] and [12]. @BeanieFan11: fix these issues and I'll approve. You may wanna update the article, but consider this optional. ミラP@Miraclepine 16:23, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that in Africa, the only countries that have passed reproductive health laws without grounds for legal abortion are Senegal and Madagascar?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Template:Did you know nominations/Mama (My Chemical Romance song), Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Neary's
• Comment: I proposed an individual hook at Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Abortion_in_Senegal, so cancel that one if this one is approved.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 17:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: The source specifies sub-Saharan Africa, so there could be theoretically countries in North Africa that have such laws which are not reflected and thus make the hook inadequate. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 18:22, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right, thanks for pointing that out. I could just tweak the hook to specify Sub-Saharan Africa; I think it's still reasonable to link that to the article.
  • ... that in Sub-Saharan Africa, the only countries that have passed reproductive health laws without grounds for legal abortion are Senegal and Madagascar?
  • The article already specifies this, so it still passes that requirement. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 20:19, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vigilantcosmicpenguin: I'm planning on reviewing this when I'm not falling asleep, however I suspect that any hook saying that they haven't passed a reproductive health law yet could fall foul of WP:DYKDEFINITE as they could theoretically pass one at any minute. I think this should be futureproofed. Also, I'll be looking to run all three in one hook, so I have closed the individual nom.--Launchballer 23:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the agricultural and industrial revolutions are key turning points in human history?

• ALT1: ... that in early human history, humans migrated out of Africa and populated most of the Earth during the Last Ice Age? Source: ^[2]
• ALT2: ... that for most of human history, children did not have access to public education? Source: ^[3]
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Betty Hanley
• Comment:

Sources

• Cajani, Luigi (2013). "Periodization". In Bentley, Jerry H. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of World History. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-968606-3.
• Christian, David (2008). This Fleeting World: A Short History of Humanity. Berkshire Publishing. ISBN 978-1-933782-04-1.
• Christian, David, ed. (2015). Introducing World History, to 10,000 BCE. The Cambridge World History. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139194662. ISBN 978-0-521-76333-2. Archived from the original on 26 January 2023. Retrieved 26 January 2023.
• Pollack, Henry (2010). A World Without Ice. Penguin. ISBN 978-1-101-52485-5.
• Scott, William; Vare, Paul (2020). Learning, Environment and Sustainable Development: A History of Ideas. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-000-20802-3. Archived from the original on 10 December 2023. Retrieved 3 May 2023.

Phlsph7 (talk) 11:52, 11 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Not a review, but two friendly comments. First, Agricultural revolution in ALT0 is a disambiguation page (I'm guessing it refers to the First agricultural revolution, which redirects to Neolithic Revolution). Second, if it's possible to make a hook about life expectancy and/or child mortality, that could be a very interesting hook indeed—I know I found John Green's video "Most People Have Never Been 20" interesting. TompaDompa (talk) 12:26, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for pointing this out, I fixed the link. A hook on changes to life expectancy could be interesting. I think the article only covers this in the sentence Advances in medical science led to a sharp increase in global life expectancy from about 31 years in 1900 to over 66 years in 2000.[552], which does not give us much to work with. Maybe:

  ALT3: ... that in modern human history, advances in medical science helped raise global life expectancy from about 31 years in 1900 to over 66 years in 2000.

  Phlsph7 (talk) 12:53, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not a big fan of ALT2, which is rather anachronistic: for most of human history, children did not live in societies in which "public education" was a meaningful concept. Given the wide scope of this article, I think a hook that encompasses a broad timescale would make the most sense. – Joe (talk) 11:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Many societies didn't really have public education so children didn't have access to it. Maybe you are concerned about something like the following: some readers may misconstrue the statement as implying that these societies did have public education but just not for most children. This is not what the hook says but it could happen. This problem could be solved by talking about formal education instead of public education but the claim in our article is about public education so this may not be acceptable according to the DYK rules. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  What I mean is that 'public education' to be a meaningful concept there first needs to exist the idea of a formal education and a state that provides public services, neither of which existed for "most of human history". In other words I think the hook anachronistically implies that children were missing out on something that was not even conceptualisable until recently. Kind of like saying "for most of human history, satellites did not use reusable launch vehicles". Technically true, but not very meaningful. – Joe (talk) 09:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Can people miss out on something for which they lack the relevant concepts? For example, the ancient Egyptians didn't have the concept of antibiotics. Can we say that "the ancient Egyptians didn't have access to antibiotics"? To my ears, this sounds acceptable. But I'm also open to different ways of expressing the idea. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ALT3 is not very well sourced. It cites page 1 of The Twentieth Century: A World History, which doesn't cite any sources for these figures, and a textbook on marketing for the "due to advances in medical science" part, which also doesn't cite a source for this claim. Neither source make it clear what specific measure of life expectancy they're using, but it's probably life expectancy at birth, which was largely a function of infant mortality in premodern societies and therefore the change involved more factors than just medical science (also improvements in public health, contraception, reduction of child poverty and malnourishment, etc). – Joe (talk) 11:24, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ALT3 is not my favorite either but I think the sources fulfill our requirements even though they themselves do not cite other sources for these claims. The hook says "helped raise" to not imply that there were no other factors. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I wouldn't say they fulfil the basic requirement of being reliable sources, in this context, per WP:EXCEPTIONAL. But this is probably best continued on the article talk page. – Joe (talk) 09:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  adjusted hook per talk page discussion at Talk:Human_history#Increase_in_life_expectancy:

  • ALT3a: ... that in modern human history, public health measures and advances in medical science helped raise global life expectancy from about 31 years in 1900 to over 66 years in 2000?

  Phlsph7 (talk) 07:44, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Jacques Lewis is believed to have been the last living French veteran of D-Day?

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Israel Del Toro

Thriley (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC). Review[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy compliance:

• Adequate sourcing:
• Neutral:
• Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing: - The article was copied from the French Wikipedia

Hook eligibility:

• Cited: - The NYT source does not support the hook as written because it only covers the US landings but there were British and Canadian beaches on D-Day too. A claim of first/last is a  Redflag and so needs excellent verification.
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - "Believed" is a weasel word and/or expression of doubt. If this is a definite fact, as it should be, then we should state it as such without such tentative language.

QPQ: - Not provided yet. Note current discussions about limiting nominations on credit like this.
Overall: I'm not sure of the formal status of translations but this review template asks Is the article free of material copied from other sources? and it isn't. The article seemed to need some copy-editing and so further work of that kind may soften the issue. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. Will fix up shortly. Thriley (talk) 21:47, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ALT1... that Jacques Lewis, a 105 year old French veteran of D-Day, insisted that he participate in a ceremony commemorating the invasion's 80th anniversary? Thriley (talk) 20:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the Netflix-released film A House in Jerusalem tells the story of a British-Jewish child who encounters the ghost of a Palestinian girl in the house where she used to live until 1948?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Palestinian right of armed resistance

Makeandtoss (talk) 11:35, 11 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Not a full review, but as the subject is a work of fiction, a new hook will need to be proposed per WP:DYKFICTION. Essentially, hooks about fictional plots alone aren't allowed on DYK. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:47, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Narutolovehinata5: Thanks for pointing out this guideline.

ALT1 ... that the director of the Netflix-released film A House in Jerusalem, Muayad Alayan, is a Palestinian whose family was expelled from what had become Israel during the Nakba in 1948? Makeandtoss (talk) 09:06, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not too fond of the hook as it seems to be more about the director than the movie itself, but will let a different editor decide. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that while Council Working Parties formally only prepare decisions by the Council of the European Union, they de facto shape the majority of those decisions? Source: Häge 2016, p. 686 "Formally, working parties only ‘prepare’ the ministers’ work, but de facto, they make the majority of Council decisions."
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tamurbek Dawletschin (claimed, not done) (done)

WatkynBassett (talk) 07:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• ... that in Hindu mythology, Madhavi, who was blessed with the miraculous ability to regain her virginity after each childbirth, was married to three kings, each in exchange for 200 rare horses?

• ALT1: ... that after fulfilling her duties as a wife to four men, Princess Madhavi chose a life of asceticism, abandoning royal luxuries to seek spiritual fulfillment in the solitude of the forest? Source: Jamison, Stephanie W. (1996). Sacrificed wife/sacrificer's wife : women, ritual, and hospitality in ancient India. Internet Archive. New York : Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-509663-7., pg 210
• Reviewed:
• Comment: This is my 4th nomination, so QPQ doesn't apply. Though I created article on 11th Aug, it was completed 2 days back

Seyamar_(245CMR)^💬📜 10:18, 21 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• ... that depending on the edition, a fairy or a gremlin grants wishes to the titular character of Hammond's Hard Lines?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Takara's Treasure
• Comment: A.K.A. C for Charlie (as a handful online have nicknamed the 1957 version for almost a decade and a half now).
  Filler project in light of higher-priority AFC tasks; inspired by this August 2024 filing at the Literature StackExchange, which came up on the parent service's "Hot Network Questons" feed one day during my perusal at GIS.SE (I'm currently engaged in a comeback geofictional project). First of two DYK nominations from yours truly today; stay tuned in a few hours for the other one.

Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:21, 20 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Note that the hook as currently written might possibly not meet WP:DYKFICTION; as such, it will either need to be revised with additional real-world context, or a new hook needs to be proposed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Slgrandson: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 23:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • ALT1: ... that Hammond's Hard Lines was one of the few school stories to feature fantasy in its plot? Source: Wotton, Joy; Auchmuty, Rosemary, eds. (2000). "Skelton Kuppord (Pseudonym for Sir John Adams)". The Encyclopaedia of School Stories. Ashgate. p. 211. ISBN 0-7546-0083-1. Retrieved 2024-09-08 – via Google Books Snippets.

ALT1 as currently written is inaccurate: there are countless examples from anime and manga alone, let alone other genres of literature. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:55, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that William, Prince of Wales (pictured), inspired the character Prince Wheeliam in Cars 2?

• ALT1: ... that William, Prince of Wales (pictured), has no plans to watch his depiction in The Crown? Source: ^[2]
• ALT2: ... that William, Prince of Wales (pictured), has been depicted by four actors in The Crown? Source: ^[3]
• ALT3: ... that Prince William's (pictured) marriage ceremony was parodied in an episode of South Park? Source: ^[4]
• ALT4: ... that William, Prince of Wales (pictured), has appeared in two documentaries about his mother Princess Diana? Source: ^[5][6]
• Reviewed:
• Comment:

Finally, as a more serious comment, I would like to note that this page's parent article appeared on Did you know less than a year ago as of this post. If this affects eligibility, please let me know.

AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 04:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I've moved the article to bring it in line with MOS:COMMA, and edited this page accordingly. Ham II (talk) 07:51, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that during his service with the French Navy pastry chef and television judge Benoit Blin cut off the tips of his fingers in a kitchen accident?

• ALT1: ... that in 2011, French-born chef Benoit Blin was president of the British team at the World Pastry Cup? Source: "Benoit is no stranger to high-end pastry competitions. He was team president of the UK Pastry Team in the 2011 Pastry World Cup " from: "BBC Two - Bake Off Creme de la Creme, Series 1 - Benoit Blin MCA". BBC. Retrieved 14 August 2024.
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Flag of Togo

Dumelow (talk) 14:32, 15 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Not a review (and no matter how much I like Bake Off The Professionals, I still do my QPQs oldest first!), but the WP:METRO is not a reliable source.--Launchballer 20:59, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up Launchballer, luckily everything was covered by the BBC source so I've switched it over to that - Dumelow (talk) 21:18, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should consider installing WP:UPSD. Full review needed.--Launchballer 21:44, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that is a very handy gadget that should be more widely known, thanks - Dumelow (talk) 07:47, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Joe Wirkkunen coached the Finland men's national ice hockey team after receiving a recommendation from Canada?

• Reviewed: Grace Panvini and Robert Aiello
• Comment: I volunteer two QPQ credits for one nomination, to help reduce the backlog of nominations without reviews.

Flibirigit (talk) 17:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: I have some concern about the roundabout way the citation verifies the hook. Presently, I think there are two logical leaps being made from "sought suggestions from the local hockey community, and Joe's name was recommended" → "receiving a recommendation from Canada?" and then "Finland was searching for a Finnish speaking instructor with knowledge of the Canadian ice hockey system." → "coached the Finland men's national ice hockey team" connected by the "after receiving" makes it sound like the coaching position was directly a result from the recommendation from Canada. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm okay with Canada being a stand-in for "local community" (we're small, I get it; and it is limited at DYK) but the implied timeline seems like a bit of a stretch, but could be easily remedied. Suggested alternative: ALT1: "... that Joe Wirkkunen, after receiving a recommendation from Canada, would go on to coach the Finland men's national ice hockey team?" just to clarify. Bobby Cohn (talk) 17:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another opinion is needed for ALT1 since neither I nor the original reviewer are eligible to approve it. Best wishes. Flibirigit (talk) 00:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Vollpension employs grandpas and grandmas (pictured) to bake cakes according to their own recipes, and during the COVID-19 pandemic offered live baking-courses from elders across the world?

• ALT1: ... that Vollpension provides additional income and generation-bridging interaction to Viennese grandpas and grandmas (pictured) by employing them to bake and serve their own cakes?

• ALT2: ... that the Viennese café Vollpension (employees pictured) addresses poverty and loneliness in elders by employing them to bake and serve their own cakes?

• Reviewed: Agnes Crane
• Comment: QPQ is coming. Alternative hooks suggestions are welcome!

Surtsicna (talk) 22:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• @Surtsicna: Per a recent WT:DYK discussion, there has been loose consensus to change the rules so that a QPQ now needs to be provided at the time of the nomination, instead of up to a week after. Please provide a QPQ at the earliest opportunity, otherwise the nomination is liable to be closed as incomplete without warning. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:36, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Narutolovehinata5. I'm on it! Surtsicna (talk) 20:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I was not aware of the rule change. It seems perfectly reasonable. Surtsicna (talk) 20:49, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Full review needed now that QPQ has been submitted. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that the Italian Campaign of 1796–1797 helped Napoleon Bonaparte establish himself as a general? Source: https://www.thoughtco.com/napoleon-and-the-italian-campaign-1221692
• ... that the Italian Campaign of 1796–1797 demonstrated that Napoleon Bonaparte was a "great strategist"? Source: https://www.napoleon.org/en/young-historians/napodoc/timeline-consulate1st-french-empire/
  • Reviewed:
  • Comment: This is a translated article. The only issue I have personally encountered is citations, which I am currently working out.

Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 16:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I screwed up the nomination template, can someone please correct. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 16:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 17:32, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Sir MemeGod: a few things need straightening out here:
• There are a lot of Harvard errors in the citations and referencing. If you haven't already, I suggest installing this script to catch and fix them.
• The two sources cited here are not really up to the bar of WP:RS. We need published works, ideally in print, by people acknowledged as experts in their field. Fortunately, Napoleon is not short of people who have written good academic work about him.
• The hooks need to be explicitly stated within the article itself: neither of these two seem to be.

I would suggest giving the article a fix for the citations, and then looking for two or three good facts from within it for which you have good sources already cited. I notice you've written that it's a translation, so make sure that these are from works that you can access to verify the citation. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, I will work to fix the issues addressed by later today, and will get back to you once everything is done. Thanks for the review! Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 13:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @User:UndercoverClassicist I can't, for the life of me, figure out how to fix the "HarvNoTarget" error. I can fix the other issues though, and have already placed the hooks in the article. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 13:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • No Target Errors mean that there isn't a unique reference defined with that ID. For example, you have two references defined as Chandler2006, so any link pointing to that will show an error. The simple way to fix this is to make one Chandler 2006a and the other Chandler 2006b. I've seen the additions to the article, but would encourage you to read what I said about sourcing: this webpage is not a quality academic source. Honestly, I think there's more specific and more interesting material for hooks in the article anyway: can you come up with a couple that are cited to good-quality sources? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Sure, here's a few I came up with:

1. "...that the Italian Campaign of 1796–1797 ended with the Treaty of Campo Formio?"
1b. Source: https://www.britannica.com/event/Treaty-of-Campo-Formio#:~:text=Treaty%20of%20Campo%20Formio%2C%20(October,Napoleon%20Bonaparte's%20first%20Italian%20campaign.
2. "...that the Italian Campaign of 1796–1797 was led by Napoleon?" (Kind of generic, I know)
2b. Source: https://www.worldhistory.org/Napoleon's_Italian_Campaign/
2c. Source:https://www.pbs.org/empires/napoleon/n_war/campaign/page_1.html#:~:text=First%20Italian%20Campaign%2C%201796%2D97,Piedmontese%2C%20then%20conquer%20each%20separately. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 15:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd also have one about the campaign being Napoleon's first major campaaign (which it was), but I can't find an RS for it. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 15:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• To add one more thing, I figured out how to fix the harverror and now it is clean. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 15:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • We need hooks that are going to be interesting or unknown to most readers -- I'm not sure either of those two really pass that muster. Did anything interesting, exciting, surprising or consequential happen during (or as a result of) the campaigns? Can you find citations that are printed books, ideally in academic presses? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I do have one more that does have reliable sources behind it, and was interesting (at least to me) when I first read about it.

• ALT0" Did you know... that Napoleon defeated the Sardinian army in just two weeks at Montenotte and Mondovì as part of the Italian Campaign of 1796–1797?"

Sources (which I've checked WP:RS/PS for reliability):
1. https://www.pbs.org/empires/napoleon/n_war/campaign/page_1.html (passes WP:RS/PS)
2. https://www.britannica.com/event/French-revolutionary-wars/Campaign-in-Italy (there is no consensus, but the information is non-controversial, so it should be fine)
Also, printed books shouldn't be a requirement, if it's stated from a RS then it should be fine. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 16:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• They're not a requirement, but most of the websites you had been citing weren't good RSs for historical information -- I think Britannica is fine; PBS is acceptable but not great for history: we can trust their integrity, but they don't claim any real academic expertise or credibility. I think the most recent ALT (which I've labelled ALT0) is good; I've taken the liberty of making some minor edits for concision and markup. Hook is in the article, but the reference doesn't quite check: PBS give the two week figure as the combined total for Montenotte and Mondovi. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:50, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Issue has been fixed, I just added "Mondovi" to the hook and to the article. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 17:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely stuff. A few copyright issues:

• File:Paintings of Napoleon I on the battlefield.jpg needs a US PD tag.
• So does File:Renault - André Masséna, duc de Rivoli, prince d'Essling, maréchal de France (1756-1817).jpg
• So does File:Rampon Monte Legino.jpg
• So does File:Il generale Bonaparte dopo la vittoria di Montenotte.jpg
• So does File:Myrbach-Battle of Lodi.jpg
• So does File:Victor Adam - Battle of Castiglione - 1836.jpg
• So does File:Bataille de Rivoli ag1.jpg
• So does File:Archdukecharles1.jpg
• So does File:Örebroporträttet.jpg
• So does File:Bonaparte di Edouard Detaille.jpg, and it also needs better source information.
• So does File:Johann Peter Beaulieu.jpg

Not strictly required, but as we're going to be directing many readers from the main page to this article, it would be good to have alt text on the images for the benefit of blind people using screen readers. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 18:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I will add the alt text for all the images shortly. I may be able to add the PD-US templates to the images within the next hour, but if not, I'll just ask for someone else to do it (Commons sometimes doesn't work on my device). Thanks! Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 18:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• All alt-texts for the images have been added. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 18:58, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • And, for the grand finale, all PD-US-EXPIRED templates have been added. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 21:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • @UndercoverClassicist: Everything has been fixed. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 13:27, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request new reviewer, reviewer has not responded in 4 days. Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 14:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to respect that request, though I note for the future reviewer that the source information on File:Bonaparte di Edouard Detaille.jpg is still insufficient. Good luck with the nomination. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:53, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that scientists publishing in Liebigs Annalen were subject to criticism and attacks by editor Justus von Liebig?

• ALT1: ... that Liebigs Annalen was first published in English 163 years after its first issue? Source: Engberts, Jan B. F. N.; Hafner, Klaus; Hopf, Henning (September 20, 1997). Temme, Robert (ed.). "What is going to become of Chemische Berichte/Recueil and Liebigs Annalen/Recueil?" (PDF). Jahrgang. Archived (PDF) from the original on May 28, 2024. Retrieved July 2, 2024., Royal Society of London (1 January 1875). "Obituary Notices of Fellows Deceased". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. 24: xxvii–xxxvii. Retrieved 5 February 2024.
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Eternaut
• Comment: ALT1 uses the first source for its first English publication year and second source for the start of publications year.

Reconrabbit 15:37, 20 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• ... that the undefeated 1961 Pittsburg State Gorillas (pictured with UPI trophy) shut out seven opponents, featured four All-Americans and won three national championships?

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Quinto Inuma Alvarado

Cbl62 (talk) 11:30, 18 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• ... that many people who recover from tuberculosis lose more than half of their lung capacity (pictured)?
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Inez Demonet

(t · c) buidhe 06:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• @Buidhe: QPQ done, only 13% overlap, the page is an orphan (possibly add it to Template:Tuberculosis) and also airways is a disambiguation link please fix that, new enough. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 15:34, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the review. The article was de orphaned and the daB link was fixed. (t · c) buidhe 17:55, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Guinea has a law banning abortion, but an interpretation of the law says that receiving an abortion is not illegal?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/superseded combination

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:59, 17 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Not surprising or interesting, most abortion laws focus on prosecuting abortion providers rather than recipients. (t · c) buidhe 06:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Agnes Crane (1852–1932) was an English amateur paleontologist who nonetheless described a new species of brachiopod and presented her work at the 1893 World's Congress in Chicago?

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Perth (1339)

Chaiten1 (talk) 19:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

There is probably nothing I like seeing more on DYK than women scientists. Thanks for this one, Chaiten1. The article is new and long enough. It covers the subject's life and career perfectly well. The sources are of very high quality and even quite accessible too. There are two issues, however. Firstly, "Crane lived in Brighton for the rest of her life" and "a role later taken on by Crane's father" require citations. Secondly, the wording of the hook can be improved. I would propose something like:

• ALT1: that despite having no university training, Agnes Crane described a new species of brachiopod in 1886?

Let me know what you think. Surtsicna (talk) 20:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the encouragement! I have added citations to the statements in the page: one is Crane's births/marriages/death entry from FreeBMD, as other sources (like probate) are behind paywalls; the other is from Edward Crane's obituary. I do like your suggestion for rewording in ALT1 - I have just inserted 'of brachiopod' - thank you!Chaiten1 (talk) 09:06, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that because the capital of the Gambia is on a small island, its population has overflowed into nearby Serekunda (pictured)?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Dublin Castle scandal, Template:Did you know nominations/A. I. Namm & Son Department Store
• Comment: Alt hooks welcome. I may come up with a more interesting hook as I continue to expand the article.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 00:40, 21 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• Going to review this later, the hook already looks interesting! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 04:42, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: I don't see the article as new, needs an explanation. The hook is a book source so AGF. I see multiple un-broad sentences, like about the dictator's rule, which isn't related to the city (only a tiny bit). 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 23:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @TheNuggeteer: Article was 5x expanded on August 19. The mentioned events of the dictator's rule took place at specific locations in Serekunda, which I think makes them relevant. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 23:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good explanation, changing. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 00:46, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I would like to reopen this nomination to add another article I have expanded. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ALT1: ... that because the capital of the Gambia is on a small island, its population has overflowed into Serekunda (pictured) in the nearby municipality of Kanifing?

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: reviewer needed to review second article, Kanifing, and the new ALT1 hook with both articles included. BlueMoonset (talk) 00:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Kanifing review

  Article was expanded from 1761 characters/288 words to 8988 characters/1422 words. This is on the border of x5 expansion, and some copyediting may bring this down. There are some paraphrasing concerns. The lead has "Kanifing is a municipality in the Gambia, to the west of Banjul...It includes Serrekunda, the largest urban area in the Gambia", which is very close to "Kanifing, a local government area, lies to the west of Banjul, the capital. It includes Serrekunda, the largest urban area in the country". "It has the largest population of any of the districts in the Gambia" in the lead is very similar to "Kanifing municipality has the largest population of any administrative district in the country" of the same source. "Kanifing is the most densely populated part of the Gambia" in the body is very similar to the same source's "making it the most densely populated area in The Gambia". "In 1991, it became the Kanifing Municipal Council" seems taken from "In 1991, KUDC was given the status of a municipal council, becoming Kanifing Municipal Council (KMC)", "Kanifing and Banjul comprise the Greater Banjul Area" is "Kanifing and the City of Banjul together form the Greater Banjul Area", both also from this source. There may be other areas, I have not checked every place this was cited. Some of these might be fine on their own as basic information, but seeing so many examples demonstrates the paraphrasing is too close. (While I cannot access many of the sources used here, I could access this waste management one, which does not seem closely paraphrased in the same way.) A related aside, the "Senegalese people comprise 92% of these" in the article is wrongly contextualised, the source notes 92% is for all of The Gambia, not just Kanifing. Talib Ahmed Bensouda's political party does not seem to be in the mentioned source.

  I have not re-checked the Serekunda article other than to check the hook. While I am not sure what "overtaking its status" in the body there means, the main point in the hook is supported. I find the hook interesting. A second QPQ was completed. CMD (talk) 10:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Chipmunkdavis: I've made tweaks to the prose to address the paraphrasing issues. I've kept the sentence "Kanifing and Banjul comprise the Greater Banjul Area" since I really don't think there's a more concise phrasing of that, and I don't know how to rephrase "the most densely populated part of the Gambia" while staying faithful to the source. I've checked for close paraphrasing from other sources and I believe I have addressed everything. Also removed the wrong statistic about refugees, thanks for pointing that out.
    As for article length, it has been expanded much more than fivefold since the expansion began. The prose size as of the revision before my edits was 561 B. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 16:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    You're right on the expansion, I was calculating one diff off, so my concern about length was mistaken. On the paraphrasing, there is still some rewriting needed. Shifting a few words doesn't remove the text echoing the source in style and structure. Shifting from saying the area has most of the country's coastal resorts and hotels to saying it has most of the country's hotels and coastal resorts does not read as a new piece of writing. "Youth unemployment (those aged 15–35 years) is 6.5%, lower than many districts in the country" should not be copied with a small change to "youth unemployment rate is 6.5%, lower than most of the country". The shifting of the "It includes Serrekunda" sentence did not affect its structure being lifted from the source. The salient information should be extracted from the source, not the sentences or structure. For example, the article currently has the text "...people who are 15 or older...and 254,337 who are unemployed". I've just realised that that figure doesn't match the preceding figures, so please check that, but whatever the figure is, that is a place that information about youth unemployment would naturally fit, say "Of workers between 15 and 35, just 6.5% are unemployed." CMD (talk) 17:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    More tweaks made, though it may be imperfect as I'm multitasking right now. Kept the phrasing "lower than most of the country" since it's more precise than just saying it's "low". I can't think of a better phrasing for the sentence about hotels. Thanks for putting in more effort than most DYK reviewers would. And thanks for pointing out the unemployment statistic; that's the kind of blunder that happens when I've stared at PDFs with tables for a bit too long. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 18:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• ... that Janet Panetta, who started dancing as physical therapy for childhood polio, would go on to teach dance all over Europe, becoming a "launchpad" for many dancers including Jérôme Bel?

• • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Book of Virtues
  • Comment: Alt hooks welcome!

Thriley (talk) 16:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC).[reply]

• I'd actually focus on the childhood polio aspect rather than the launchpad aspect given that's a much more surprising fact and already works by itself. The current hook seems too complicated as is compared to the shorter option. Thus:

ALT1 ... that Janet Panetta started dancing as physical therapy for childhood polio?

@Thriley and DaffodilOcean: Thoughts on the simplified hook? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - the new hook is fine by me, though I welcome @Thriley:'s thoughts as they made the nomination. DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)