Template talk:Did you know

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

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


Count of DYK Hooks
Section # of Hooks # Verified
April 24 1
May 1 1
May 4 1
May 5 1
May 20 1
May 21 1
May 24 1 1
June 2 1
June 3 1
June 4 2
June 5 2
June 7 2 1
June 8 2
June 9 1
June 10 1
June 15 1
June 16 1
June 18 1
June 19 1 1
June 20 1
June 21 2 1
June 23 3
June 24 1
June 25 1 1
June 27 1
June 28 1 1
June 29 2 1
June 30 1
July 1 2
July 3 4 1
July 4 3 2
July 5 1 1
July 6 1 1
July 8 2
July 9 1
July 10 1
July 11 3 2
July 12 1 1
July 17 7 2
July 18 2 1
July 19 3 2
July 20 5 2
July 21 4 2
July 22 4 2
July 23 4 3
July 24 7 2
July 25 4 2
July 26 6 4
July 27 7 3
July 28 10 7
July 29 5 2
July 30 5 2
July 31 5 3
August 1 5 4
August 2 7 5
August 3 12 9
August 4 6 2
August 5 6 3
August 6 9 6
August 7 8 2
August 8 5 3
August 9 9 3
August 10 10 4
August 11 6 5
August 12 9 4
August 13 13 7
August 14 10 6
August 15 14 4
August 16 7 5
August 17 11 6
August 18 11 4
August 19 8 1
August 20 6
August 21 3
August 22 6
Total 314 137
Last updated 20:32, 22 August 2019 UTC
Current time is 20:50, 22 August 2019 UTC [refresh]

Instructions for nominators[edit]

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

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

To nominate an article[edit]

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

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

Write the nomination.

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

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

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

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

How to review a nomination[edit]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Frequently asked questions[edit]


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

Where is my hook?[edit]

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

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

Search archived DYK nomination discussions[edit]

Instructions for other editors[edit]

How to promote an accepted hook[edit]

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

How to remove a rejected hook[edit]

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

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

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

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

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


Older nominations[edit]

Articles created/expanded on April 24[edit]

Bladimir Lugo

  • Comment: New article created on 26 April. This person is controversial during the Crisis in Venezuela.

Created by Cyfraw (talk) and Jamez42 (talk). Nominated by Cyfraw (talk) at 07:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC).

  • Hi Cyfraw - The date seems a little redundant. Expanded within time. Plenty of prose and no copyvio that I could find. Hooks seem a little questionable to me - "attacked?" It seems more like they have stormed the building. I don't know. It's a little confusing; might just need a reword. ALT1 is better, if you remove the date, and put in "promoted" for "awarded". Sources are fine though Symbol possible vote.svg Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 07:44, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
pinging @Cyfraw and Jamez42: in case you want to respond and get this out for the June 29 anniversary? Kingsif (talk) 13:56, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
It's better to display this DYK on June 29. Just correct the blurb correctly. --cyrfaw (talk) 21:09, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
So, like? @Lee Vilenski and Cyfraw:
Kingsif (talk) 21:19, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Better, but should say "only moments after leading a "siege"" --cyrfaw (talk) 21:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I'm a lot happier with that. I'd pass, but just check with Cyfraw before I give the tick. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:42, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I'm ready with the DYK blurb. --cyrfaw (talk) 21:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 06:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I was wondering if you read the article, @Lee Vilenski:? The grammar doesn't make sense, and I tagged several words that aren't English. In this run-on paragraph under Controversy, where does this sentence begin and end:
  • On 29 December 2016, he allegedly assaulted NTN24 journalist Rafael Hernández, hitting to his work team and banning him from entering the country's vice-presidency, when he pushed and tripped Antonieta Mendoza, mother of Leopoldo López, and again on 28 June he pushed the president of the National Assembly Julio Borges.
  • Or this run-on sentence, which seems to blame journalists for attacking journalists:
  • Tinedo Guía, the president of the National Association of Journalists (CNP), rejected the continuous aggressions against him of journalists, cameramen, and photographers who cover the Federal Legislative Palace on a daily basis given by GNB officials commanded by Lugo for what declared him persona non grata, urging the rest of the CNP section of the country to comply with this statement, calling on the competent institutions to investigate and reject irregular facts.
  • In the third paragraph under "Controversy", it's not explained why this is a controversy. Similarly, the fourth paragraph seems more like a grudge by the media than a "controversy". Wikipedia is not a court of law. The section "2017 Venezuelan National Assembly attack", starting with calling it an "attack" and the language used throughout the section, like saying journalists were "held captive", is very POV. Also, shouldn't "allegedly" be added somewhere if he wasn't convicted in a court of law? No explanation is given for why two days after the siege Lugo was suddenly promoted.
  • Finally, it's not clear why he's being called Bladimir instead of Vladimir. Yoninah (talk) 10:21, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I was the creator of the article. First of all I will take a look at some of the grammar errors. Second, his name should be "Bladimir" instead of "Vladimir" since most Venezuelan news outlets mention "Bladimir". Also @Lee Vilenski: can help me fix these problems. --cyrfaw (talk) 10:27, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

pinging @Kingsif and Jamez42: as well --cyrfaw (talk) 10:29, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. I notice at WT:DYK#Bladimir Lugo the comment by Cwmhiraeth that since this is a BLP, the presentation must be handled very neutrally. Yoninah (talk) 10:30, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm similarly confused about the question "it's not clear why he's being called Bladimir instead of Vladimir" — because his name is Bladimir. Venezuela is full of bastardizations and hispanifications of Russian names, and 'v' is pronounced 'b' in Spanish, which may be why his parents gave him this name. A name's a name, odd that you would question it. I can help with the clean-up if needed. Kingsif (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
I noticed that in several references his name is spelled Vladimir, so I asked. Yoninah (talk) 10:37, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Ah, I haven't exactly been through the sources - but state TV (because Youtube) uses Bladimir, and they'll have his ID card. Kingsif (talk) 10:39, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Even if you look at the sanctions list by Panama, Canada and the US, his name is mentioned in full and as "Bladimir" not "Vladimir". --cyrfaw (talk) 10:42, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Like this, Bladimir Humberto Lugo Armas --cyrfaw (talk) 10:43, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
The name seems plenty well sourced enough for me. Sources using Vladimir could easily be errant spelling corrections. I'll take a look at the article, but I don't think it's that bad. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:03, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
"Vladimir" is way more common in Spanish, like defense ministry Vladimir Padrino López. I had a similar confusion in the Spanish article, but I think I checked his legal name as well as the prevalence of the use. Bladimir is most certainly his name. --Jamez42 (talk) 17:38, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I notice that some editing has been done on the article. You may want to apply at WP:GOCE for a copyeditor who is familiar with English grammar. Yoninah (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Ok, but where running out of time to meet the article deadline for DYK. We have less than 12h away. --cyrfaw (talk) 16:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Otherwise, delay the DYK posting for a few days until the article is fixed. Once it is fixed, this DYK can be posted ASAP when ready. I already requested for copy-writing here. Is that OK? --cyrfaw (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Sure, that's fine. Yoninah (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Yoninah: @Lee Vilenski: It's been two weeks that I referred this article to the GOCE for copy edit. However, my request still remains unanswered. Any solutions to this, because where running out of time to promote this as DYK. The two year anniversary has already passed away on 29 June. What solutions are available for putting this into Main Page? --cyrfaw (talk) 08:05, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Should we wait for it to be posted on the Main Page after copy editing is done? I already made a lot of efforts to improve the page. --cyrfaw (talk) 08:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
It often takes time to complete the GOCE review. From the point of view of DYK, we're in no hurry. This nomination will stay on the nomination page as long as necessary. Please let me know when the GOCE is done. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

@Yoninah: @Lee Vilenski: The copy edit process is now complete, as one user notified me through my talk pages. What are your thoughts for this? Is it ready for DYK or additional things are needed before proceeding? -cyrfaw (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Green check.svg First DYK article so no QPQ required
Green check.svg Article created by Cyfraw on April 25, 2019 with 6742 characters (1047 words) "readable prose size"
Green check.svg NPOV
Green check.svg ALT2 Hook is interesting, short enough and sourced with Refs 12 and 13
Green check.svg Hook is sourced to:
  • Ref 12 "Deputies and journalists in the AN remained "kidnapped" for more than four hours after government siege"
  • Ref 13 "The President of the Republic, Nicolás Maduro, decorated the night of Thursday, June 29, Colonel Bladimir Humberto Lugo Armas ... 480 soldiers of the National Armed Forces (FANB) that make up the Presidential Honor Guard received the promotion to the immediate superior degree."
Green check.svg Every paragraph sourced
Green check.svg Earwig @ Toolserver Copyvio Detector found no copyvio
Symbol confirmed.svg GTG -- Thats Just Great (talk) 20:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I came by to finally promote this, but ALT2 is 251 characters long which is 51 more than the maximum amount allowed. SL93 (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I think ALT3 is 200 characters and ALT4 without the time frame is 185-- Thats Just Great (talk) 04:49, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Striking ALT3 for excessive length. ALT1 says he was "awarded" moments later, while ALT4 says he was "promoted" moments later. Please clarify. Actually, I would suggest deleting all the name-dropping and just stating the hook fact in brief. Let people click on your article to learn more. Yoninah (talk) 19:14, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT5:... that Colonel Bladimir Lugo was promoted two years ago, only moments after leading a siege against the Venezuelan National Assembly president?
  • Ref 12 "Deputies and journalists in the AN remained "kidnapped" for more than four hours after government siege"
  • Ref 13 "The President of the Republic, Nicolás Maduro, decorated the night of Thursday, June 29, Colonel Bladimir Humberto Lugo Armas ... 480 soldiers of the National Armed Forces (FANB) that make up the Presidential Honor Guard received the promotion to the immediate superior degree."
  • Thanks, Thats Just Great. I think it could be tweaked a little to get rid of the two time references:
  • ALT5a: ... that Bladimir Lugo, colonel of the Bolivarian National Guard, was promoted moments after leading a siege against the president of the Venezuelan National Assembly?
  • But is this even hooky? We have to be careful of BLP issues, but is this the hookiest thing that can be said? My previous experience with this DYK nomination makes me think that the nominators have a POV issue to advance. Yoninah (talk) 20:06, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • That's quite a strong claim, I wouldn't like to think so; I also hope you appreciate my growing experience at DYK in reading the Alt proposals as just trying to make it more hooky. If you don't think it is, a read of the article brings me to other suggestions - though they are also rather 'negative' (if that is a BLP issue then perhaps the article should go, since it's largely a rap sheet of all the important things Lugo's done that he seems to have done wrong):
  • ALT6: ... that less than a month after being awarded a Venezuelan military Cross, the same nation's Public Ministry summoned Bladimir Lugo for multiple attack accusations?
  • ALT7: ... that Venezuelan general Bladimir Lugo is sanctioned by two nations for unconstitutional actions in his home country, and in another for the distinct charges of money laundering?
Kingsif (talk) 23:10, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Those hooks are a little rough. Copyedited versions below Thats Just Great (talk) 15:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC):
  • ALT8: ... that less than a month after being awarded a Venezuelan military Cross, Venezuela's Public Ministry summoned Bladimir Lugo over accusations of multiple attacks?
  • ALT9: ... that Venezuelan general Bladimir Lugo is sanctioned by two nations for actions in Venezuela, and in another for money laundering charges?
  • Striking the BLP violations. ALT8 is okay. I'd like to look at this carefully a little later. Yoninah (talk) 16:38, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  • OK, I've read the whole article. I'm sorry, I don't find the page neutral at all. You have 3 sentences about his career and 2 sentences about his promotion and awards, and the rest is paragraph after paragraph explaining why he's a no-goodnik. The page reads like a charge sheet. The first paragraph under "Incidents and controversies", and other attacks credited to him, doesn't even use the word "allegedly". There are no balancing statements from authorities or anyone else defending him or explaining why what he did could be construed differently.
  • I understand this was edited by the GOCE, but what is a sentence like this doing here?
  • Tinedo Guía, the president of the National Association of Journalists (CNP), rejected the continuous aggressions against him from journalists, cameramen, and photographers who covered the Federal Legislative Palace on a daily basis carried out by National Guardsmen commanded by Lugo, reason why he declared him persona non grata and urged the rest of the CNP sections of the country to comply with this statement and called on the competent institutions to investigate and reject incorrect facts. Yoninah (talk) 20:48, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── I'll say I haven't fully read the page in a while and will look it over, but remember that NPOV is based on presentation and tone, not the content. Some people do more bad things than good, at least that shows up in media. We're not going to shorten the genocide section on Hitler's article to make it only as long as the art school mention, so the length counts you cite are effectively meaningless. As said, though, I'll see what I can do to make it neutral if you really think it isn't. Kingsif (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Ok, I just made this edit, which addressed the parts I found concerning. I've also added more subheadings that indicate where the 'negative' is that people are calling controversy over orders he did or didn't give (i.e. make it clear that not all allegations are violence); plus a short intro to the section on incidents that is simple but hopefully outlines there is politics involved with accusations and why some of the non-violent actions may be described in quotes so strongly. The strong language in WP voice was removed or rephrased, and where there has been no charge or there is no tangible evidence for orders/violence (most of the violence does have recordings attached in sources), "allegedly" or some version that reads well has been added. Some irrelevant parts have been wholesale removed, as they were artificially lengthening the controversy section. Kingsif (talk) 21:48, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check that the issues raised with neutrality have been fully addressed and to confirm that ALT8 and the other unstruck hooks are okay. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:30, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 1[edit]

Louisville Sinking Fund Building

  • Comment: Saturday May 4 is the Kentucky Derby in Louisville KY, which usually gets an in the news spot that day. May be of related interest to this article.

Created by Charles Edward (talk). Self-nominated at 15:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Charles Edward: (AGF good pending QPQ) The article is new enough and long enough at 1770 characters, and I'm AGF on the hook source as it is offline. One suggestion is that all but two sentences start with the word "the", and more variety in beginning sentences would improve the way it reads; I've made some changes as well to this end. You also need a QPQ to continue. Raymie (tc) 03:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
@Raymie: The nominator hasn't edited since the beginning of the month. He has also been unable to provide a QPQ. If the QPQ is the last remaining issue, would it be alright with you if I donate a QPQ in his stead? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC) Actually, according to the QPQ tool, the nominator has no prior DYK credits, so no QPQ was needed for this nomination. If there are no more remaining issues, then can this be passed now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol voting keep.svg @Narutolovehinata5: I would be fine with this moving forward, then. It's on the short side but it meets the requirements. Raymie (tc) 03:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Came to promote, but the hook is a little bland. The article says the building once had a tower that was used as a fire lookout. Could we build a hook around that? --valereee (talk) 16:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Working on the article. Stay for a day or two. WBGconverse 05:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, and corrected the referencing as well as added another source. I think the first hook is good—the building name itself is good for a laugh—but I don't see the second hook fact about the tax collection department in the source. I struck ALT1 because it gives away the joke. Yoninah (talk) 18:59, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg It has been nearly one month since my last edit and there has been no response from the nominator. If this isn't addressed within one week, it will be closed as unsuccessful. Yoninah (talk) 23:18, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Comment: I found this source for tax collectors, but it's a self-published Amazon book, so not terribly reliable. I also came across the NRHP nomination, which might be useful for expansion of the article, but it doesn't have much on tax collectors. The NRHP nomination is for three buildings – the Sinking Fund Building, City Hall, and the City Hall Annex – and it seems like the Annex was more permanently involved with tax collection. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:01, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg You pinged and I wound up doubling the size of the article with expansions. I can't review now, but I am going to suggest new hooks: Raymie (tc) 05:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
ALT2: ... that the Louisville Sinking Fund Building was saved from demolition by 15,000 votes?
ALT3: ... that busts of two former city fire department officials adorn the Louisville Sinking Fund Building?
ALT4: ... that the Louisville Sinking Fund Building went from being slated for demolition to being listed on the National Register of Historic Places in six years?
ALT2 and ALT4 are the best options (with a slight preference for ALT4); ALT3 seems rather bland and typical. Will wait for a response from others before signing them off, though. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:31, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
I think ALT4 is the best. Thanks, Raymie! Yoninah (talk) 13:49, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Almost ready to be reviewed, only that there seems to be an error with the Reflist displaying reference 13. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 4[edit]


  • ... that Agadzagadza the trickster lizard is blamed as the cause of death in Bura mythology?
    • ALT1:... that Agadzagadza is a mythological trickster from Uganda who is responsible for bringing death to humankind?
      • ALT2:... that Agadzagadza is a mythological trickster from Nigeria who is responsible for bringing death to humankind?
        • ALT3:... that Agadzagadza the trickster lizard is blamed as the cause of death in Nigerian mythology?
  • Reviewed: I think I'm exempt from review, but please let me know if this isn't the case!

Created by You've got Koalatee (talk). Nominated by Gardneca (talk) at 06:34, 10 May 2019 (UTC).


Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - ALT1 fails as the article doesn't seem to mention Uganda. An issue with the primary hook is the reference to the "Bura". This isn't linked in the hook or article. Possible links include Bura people (which redirects to Kilba people) or Bura language (aka Bura/Pabir). I reckon we need to clarify this and the exact source which is supporting it.
This is my fault, I meant Nigeria not Uganda! Whoops. Linking to Bura people should work. Gardneca (talk) 17:29, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Interesting: Green tickY
QPQ: None required.

Overall: Symbol question.svg It's not clear to me whether the word Agadzagadza is the Bura/Pabir name for a lizard or whether it's the proper name of this particular trickster. I suppose it's a bit of both like Coyote.

I think you're right Gardneca (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Shalor (Wiki Ed) Andrew Davidson I'd like to continue with this but since I'm new to the process I'm not sure what the next step should be. I responded to the issues and made changes, so please advise as to how to proceed. Thanks! Gardneca (talk) 07:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I'll take another look. More anon. Andrew D. (talk) 09:13, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Gonna assume this has been put on hold, so I hope you don't mind me taking over. QPQ not required, no copyvio issues, nominated in time. Strike ALT1, as it's not Ugandan, and suggest a link to Bura people. Much prefer ALT2. Not sure "Cause of death" is quite right. Symbol voting keep.svg Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:17, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Pulled from prep per discussion at WT:DYK#Prep 5: Trickster; article has four "citation needed" tags and these need to be supplied before the article can proceed. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol possible vote.svg If this isn't resolved in a week, this can be closed as failed. SL93 (talk) 09:33, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Note: I pinged nominator Gardneca on their talk page on 15 August, giving them seven days to take action. If we haven't heard back by tomorrow, I plan to put the "no" icon on this page then, though we can certainly wait until 28 August, as SL93 suggests, before actually closing the nomination as "rejected". BlueMoonset (talk) 12:58, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  • That's fine too. I didn't notice it. SL93 (talk) 16:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Apologies for the delay SL93 and BlueMoonset, the "citation needed" areas have been addressed. Gardneca (talk) 21:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 5[edit]


  • ... that several sultans in Morocco and the Ottoman Empire were deposed by a fatwa? Source: "...several Ottoman and Moroccan sultans were deposed by fatwas" ("Fatwa", in The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 2013, p. 174)
    • ALT1:... that according to some scholars Ayatollah Khomeini's proclamation condemning Salman Rushdie to death was not a fatwa? Source: "...Ayatollah Khomeini (1902–89) issued a statement calling for the execution of author Salman Rushdie for insulting Islam in his novel The Satanic Verses. Although not strictly a fatwa, this death sentence was quickly treated as such" ("Fatwa", in The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 2013, p. 174); "There are some views that deny that this actually was a fatwa, as it did not follow the classical criteria of form or function for a fatwa." (Vikør, Knut S. (2005). Between God and the Sultan: A History of Islamic Law. Oxford University Press, p. 142)
  • Reviewed: Exempt from QPQ - 1 DYK credit so far.

Improved to Good Article status by Eperoton (talk). Self-nominated at 23:15, 6 May 2019 (UTC).

Article is well sourced, and hooks are reasonably interesting. They do suggest that the reader knows what a fatwa is, before reading the article, however. QPQ not required. Hooks are cited. No copyvio. See below for more comments. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:48, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Definitely newly promoted enough and long enough. An Earwig check is a liiiiitle iffy. Specifically, "allowed a female convert to Islam to remain married to her non-Muslim husband, based in part on the existence of European laws and customs which guarantee women the freedom of religion" If the source is somehow freely licensed or public domain, then fine enough. Otherwise that's stretching the limits of fair use a bit too far. Similarly, (though Earwig doesn't pick this bit up) the opening sentence is nearly verbatim from the Princeton Encyclopedia source. The hook, is exactly verbatim from the Princeton Encyclopedia source. So these really need to be quoted or they need to be reworded. Fair use gives us leeway with attributed quotes, but not with unatributed ones. Additional manual spot checks only picked up one additional issue. A large portion of this was either copied to Fatwa from Mufti or visa versa. But I don't see on either article, either in edit summaries or on the talk page where the original is attributed. This is required by the CCBYSA license, and so it needs to be sorted out which is the original and which is the copy, so we can make sure we're in compliance with WP:COPYWITHIN.
User:Lee Vilenski it looks like we had an edit conflict, but you probably want to revisit your approval given the above. GMGtalk 14:46, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

───────────────────────── @GreenMeansGo: thanks for the closer review.

  • I have rephrased the passages underlined above.
  • For the definition, it's important to reflect the definitions found in the sources, which are themselves similar to each other. I think this one falls under: "Limited close paraphrasing is also appropriate if there are only a limited number of ways to say the same thing."
  • I was reluctant to paraphrase those few words in the hook because I feared introducing OR. For example, one could replace "deposed" by "forced to abdicate", but it doesn't quite mean the same thing. I feel this is also in the area of "limited number of ways to say the same thing". P.S. On closer inspection, how about this paraphrase of the hook?
  • I contributed all the text in both Fatwa and Mufti, so my edits are the appropriate attribution.

Let me know if you still have concerns. Eperoton (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Do you think we should gloss fatwa as "(nonbinding legal opinion)" or "(nonbinding legal opinion on a point of Islamic law)" in the hooks? Eperoton (talk) 22:57, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Wouldn't an opinion by definition not be legally binding? I think fatwa (legal opinion) makes sense, but It's not really something I understand entirely. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@Lee Vilenski: Binding legal opinions do exist in some legal systems, but we can use the shorter gloss in the hook for brevity. Eperoton (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as COPYWITHIN, unless you are positive that there were no other contributors to the duplicated content, i.e., if they were both added at the same time, then we would still need attribution. But that's really too easy, just use a WP:DUMMYEDIT on whatever article was last and say "text from this article copied from that article".
Just to be safe, I'll see if we can't get a second opinion on whether the hook runs into close paraphrasing issues. Maybe I'm over thinking it. Never hurts to ask. GMGtalk 12:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: Thanks, second opinion on the hook would be good. Regarding attribution, the text of both articles either came out of my sandbox or was added by me to both articles at about the same time. I do include attributions in edit summaries when I copy text with other contributors. Eperoton (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

No comment on the close paraphrasing issue, but terms like "fatwa" do not need to be defined in hooks, the hook is only there to tweak interest in a topic not to define terms, if we did the latter DYK would end up looking like a dictionary extract. People who don't know what a "fatwa" is and would like to know more get to click on the link, that's the whole point. Gatoclass (talk) 03:29, 15 May 2019 (UTC).

  • I agree that there is some paraphrasing that is too close to the sources. Compare for example "A mufti's understanding of the query commonly depended on their grasp of local customs and colloquial expressions" with "Such comprehension frequently depended on the muftī  's grasp of both local custom and colloquial expression". Nikkimaria (talk) 22:12, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Can you elaborate your concern, Nikkimaria? I can't quite connect it to WP:CLOP. Nothing in this sentence strikes me as a "creative expression", and as I far as I can tell, there's a limited number of ways of expressing this particular assertion without changing the meaning or using unnatural language. This is a general issue that's important for articles on contentious topics, where I tend to edit, so I want to clarify for the future. I normally try to rephrase and rearrange content as much as the subject permits, and alternate statements drawing on different sources, but no so much as to introduce OR. CLOP, and particularly WP:LIMITED, seems to be formulated in a reasonably flexible way that permits this approach. Eperoton (talk) 22:57, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
P.S. So, for example, I now rewrote this as "A mufti's understanding of the query commonly depended on their familiarity with local customs and colloquialisms", which would minimize Earwig-style issues. Does that address your concern, or do you consider any statement that conveys the meaning of a statement from the source with a similar syntactic structure to be a CLOP violation, regardless of whether it can be naturally expressed otherwise? Eperoton (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
NOCREATIVE applies to things like "X was born on 1 January 1900", when there truly is no originality in the phrasing; that's not the case with the example I've cited. If you truly cannot find an adequate way to represent such a phrase, you can always quote it. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Ok, so did the rephrased version address this particular concern? Eperoton (talk) 22:26, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Narutolovehinata5: I'm fine to go with a light rewording just to be on the safe side.
  • ALT3 ... that influential Islamic jurists used fatwas to dethrone several sultans in Morocco and the Ottoman Empire?
  • It's mot much, but it does put some daylight between the hook and the verbatim text, pulling bits of content from surrounding sentences in the source. If everyone's okay with that, then I'm perfectly fine to throw a tick on it and carry on. GMGtalk 12:36, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for following up on the nomination. I've used GMG's ideas to rephrase the text of the article to a version I slightly prefer (ALT4 ... that several sultans in Morocco and the Ottoman Empire were dethroned as a result of fatwas issued by influential jurists), but ALT3 seems close enough in meaning, as well as having the added benefit of brevity. Eperoton (talk) 03:18, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I agree w Eperoton that ALT4 is better because teher s a hint of an explanation what fatwa is- the point of DYK is to read the article of the term in bold font and if one gets no clue what it is one isnt pulled into it.Wuerzele (talk) 03:28, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 20[edit]

Jew with a coin, Joanna Tokarska-Bakir, "Never Again" Association, Rafał Pankowski

Jew with a coin figurines on sale in Polańczyk
Jew with a coin figurines on sale in Polańczyk
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/2019–20 RFU Championship
  • Comment: I have a bunch of articles here, but the really-really hooky and cool one is Jew with a coin. Reviewer - you have an important job - I've listed many possible hooks - please convey your opinions on which hook (or hooks) are the hookiest (or in this case, convey a WTF moment). If we have an additional article in the hook (other than Jew with a coin) that's a bonus - but the main-main thing I want here is hookiness.

Created by Icewhiz (talk), Piotrus (talk), (talk), Drmies (talk), E.M.Gregory (talk), MyMoloboaccount (talk), Kayteigh (talk), Xx236 (talk), Jpbowen (talk), and Slatersteven (talk). Nominated by Icewhiz (talk) at 08:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Date, size, copyvio spotcheck, QCQ ok. Concern #1: the article is not stable yet, a few days may be needed for some tug of wars/reverts/etc. do die down; there's also a NPOV template at the top of the article, this needs to be removed and not challenged for the DYK to be stable for main page. (Ping me if you think this has happened and I'll rereview this). Concern #2. Hooks are interesting, but 1) first one - I don't think qualifier "many" is correct, per my comment on nom's talk page. 2) ok, but I'd add 'some', I don't think it's a custom for majority of them 3) ok but just one minor event, a bit boring 4) I like it, through perhaps a bit too technical for a casual reader 4) my favorite 5) interesting, but I'd rather go with 4 that attribute a single scholar opinion that may not be universally shared. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:16, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Note you are co-named as an author - you should not be reviewing. These are in 18% of around 10 million homes = many. If you have a better word - go ahead and suggest. There is a NPOV tag only on Pankowski, which is only relevant for one hook (ALT2) - the others should be good.Icewhiz (talk) 12:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. I'll just note that neither Pankowski nor the Association seem to be linked in the hook, they probably should have stand-alone and separate DYK nominations and hooks. For what's it worth, I think the 'jew with the coin' article is neutral right now, but whether it is stable, I am unsure. The next reviewer will check on that anyway. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:35, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svgObject-Joannas Tokarska-Bakirs claims have been widely rejected by others up to the point of her being openly ridiculed by other scholars in this field[1]. Right now her claims are shown as valid and serious.Just one of the issues the article has.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:03, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
It is attributed analysis - and I don't quite see where the Polish language journal states that. Please note that BLPTALK applies vs. the chair of the ethnic and national relations study at the Polish Academy of Sciences's Institute of Slavic Studies who is a well respected and widely cited authority in the field.Icewhiz (talk) 11:34, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Actually Tokarska herself mentions this and calls Sorbona professor Ludwik Stomma who ridiculed her "ancient lizard"(best translation to her insult "praszczur" I could think of)and mastodont[2]</ref>
All the source you have brought shows is that Stomma, who per plwiki is also a columnist in Hustler magazine, disagreed with Tokarska-Bakir - a chair ethnic and national relations study. Unsurprisingly, Tokarska-Bakir's analysis continues to be quoted and cited - usually without Stomma.Icewhiz (talk) 12:21, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
Stomma is reliable,and actually seems to have both longer and higher scholar status that Tokarska.Worked at University of Warsaw,Krakow Jagiellonian University, Institute of Arts PAN, University of Torun, published over 14 books on ethnology and worked at Sorbonna University.Has dozens of dozens of scholarly articles.MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:28, 25 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Tread carefully, my friends. EEng 07:27, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Nomination has been stuck for weeks due to possible fringe topics concerns. Due to this, unless the editors and reviewers can come into an agreement, this nomination is now marked for closure as unsuccessful. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I have reopened this nomination for a new reviewer. Probably do it myself soon. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:46, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Thanks. The main hook, ALT1, and ALT4 should be good to go. Icewhiz (talk) 06:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
    Icewhiz, I am going to read the article carefully over the next few days. I am sure you are pretty familiar with how DYK works. So, if the other articles are also technically qualifying of a DYK per the usual rules (GA or 5X expansion and more than 1500 char, etc.), I will invite you to nominate them on separate template pages. I will review them all separately and consider 24 May as their inherited nomination date.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
    All the others technically meet DYK rules, however I do not intend to nom them (unless they fit into one of the hooks here - which is not a goal - I want the most hooky hook). Jew with a coin is cool and really hooky - real DYK material. The others are OK+ articles but a "meh" for DYK (they were all written as part of the same editing arc, and might get views off of Jew with a coin).Icewhiz (talk) 15:46, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1 -- they "blame the Jew" -- blame the Jew? Huh? What does that even mean? ALT4 -- "good use charm" -- what's a good use charm? And the article is a jumble of confusing and conflicting statements about these grotesques' history and symbolism. I again urge caution. EEng 23:25, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
    The article is not a jumble - it could be slightly better organized and/or split into more subsections ("Ethnographic analysis" - sourced to multiple journal articles, at present - attributing each one (as we do when sources provide different interpretations - as they often do in anthropology and cultural studies) - could be) - It is 13Kb of prose, well under WP:SIZERULE. It is well sourced - mainly to academic sources, with some NEWSORG coverage. As for the hooks:
    ALT1 - source1, quoting Dr Shimon Samuels: "They are sold in huge numbers outside football matches and people buy them to bring luck to their side," he said. "But if their team loses, then the Jews are blamed.", source2: "Some take them along to football games for luck. If your team doesn't win it's the Jew's fault.". "Blame the Jew" here means either blaming the figurine and/or Jews generally - who failed to provide the "good luck" they were supposed to. I think the hook properly reflects the sources and that "blame the Jew" is obvious in context - it could be reworded if needed.
A football fan from Wrocław (population 650 000) has never seen such figurines. Where do they sell them?Xx236 (talk) 10:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
Source? One football fan? Small sample. I could point you to several brick and mortar stores (but not in Wrocław, off hand), but my simplest pointer would be allegro.pl (the Polish eBay/Amazon) where there are numerous items for sale of this type - allegro.pl search - and they do deliver.Icewhiz (talk) 11:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
And your academic result is ? "Some Poles buy poor quality pictures of Jews." We still don't know geographical distribution. You article describes Warsaw fans, one city. I have watched pictures in a souvenir shop in Wrocław, no such picture. I have asked if they hav eone to not influence the market.Xx236 (talk) 11:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg The new ALT6 seems fine to me, the article is stable and can be promoted. However, since the review started, I've been added to the list of authors (and contributed a bit to the article), so perhaps another reviewer is needed? Ping User:BlueMoonset, user:Coffeeandcrumbs, . --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:42, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New and independent reviewer and assessment needed; as Piotrus is receiving credit for this nomination, he should absolutely not be reviewing or (especially) approving it. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Hooks below (copied from above) should be OK AFAICT (from this discussion):
  1. main: ... that in many Polish homes images of Orthodox Jews holding coins hang to the left of the doorway, and are customarily flipped over on the Sabbath so that good fortune may fall unto the home?
  2. ALT1:... that Polish football fans buy figurines of Orthodox Jews holding coins for good luck, but blame the Jew if their team loses?
  3. ALT6:... that while common today as a good luck charm in Poland, figurines of Orthodox Jews holding coins were probably first created in the times following the transition of government in 1989?

I think the main hook is most interesting. I am not opposed to minor language tweaks in any of these. Thanks! Icewhiz (talk) 15:30, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Repeating for clarity: a full review from scratch is needed, as the only previous reviews covering the general DYK criteria were made by someone receiving credit for work on the article. Thanks to any reviewer willing to take this on. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:31, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Issues have not been resolved, fringe views are still presented and the article isn't neutral. MyMoloboaccount
    • The article uses mainstream sources. If are challenging one of them - please be specific, back up with sources.Icewhiz (talk) 03:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Inviting EEng or Coffeeandcrumbs to give this a new review. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:24, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
    It pains me to turn down such a request but I just don't have time in the foreseeable future. But please be careful. EEng 05:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
    I don't know if I have the time to do a full review in a reasonable amount of time. However, I have two concerns I would like to voice:
    1. Where does the title "Jew with a coin" come from? Is there a reasonable argument for COMMONNAME in English-language sources? Otherwise, the title of the article in itself is not NPOV and should be renamed "Caricatures of Jews with a coin" or "Polish caricatures of Jews with a coin".--- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
    2. Whether or not the title is changed, the word caricature needs to appear in the first sentence. Otherwise, we would be accused, fairly, of claiming that these are honest portrayals of Jewish people.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
    Without these issues first being addressed, I do not feel comfortable getting into this minefield. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
    @Coffeeandcrumbs: - see source by Joanna Tokarska-Bakir using this in the title in English. (see also this translation from French with a similar name, [3] - Haaretz, [4] - Vice). There is a bit of variance in terminology in English, however all 3 other Wikis (Polish, Hebrew, and Russian) go with "Jew with coin(s)". As for stating outright it is a caricature - it is more complex. When I first encountered these - I had the same thought ("antisemitic caricature") as a knee-jerk reaction. However sources are much more nuanced - it seems that while based on prior caricatures, this has morphed into a good luck charm with some innocent uses. WP:RSes covering this reflect this nuance - this is true both for academic sources, and media - e.g. Tablet (A Jewish-American magazine) - POPULAR IMAGES OF JEWS IN KRAKOW: FOLK ART OR STEREOTYPICAL CARICATURES?. Our lead currently has the whole second paragraph (out of 2) devoted to whether it is antisemitic or a good-luck charm - so I don't think we should state this outright as a caricature. Would you be OK with an insertion of "controversial" to the first sentence of the first paragraph - "...are controversial images or figurines of a Jew holding a coin.... ? Icewhiz (talk) 10:28, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Some more problematic things that should be rephrased and additions I suggest:

  • Jews were associated with money and financial gain in Poland for many centuries -- associated is ambiguous and opened misinterpretation.
  • Jews have become associated with success in the capitalistic West -- same problem
  • Lehrer is given too much weight. Add more criticism from Umińska-Keff to balance, especially how In Poland, most often anti-Semitism is not recognized as anti-Semitism and how the duplication of myths and stereotypes continues, until it becomes mundane or commonplace. That Education would be the only effective answer, but there is none. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 11:24, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Fixed 1+2 (I think). Added 3. Lehrer is a bit over weighted (though part of it is that she's published in English + publicized in popular English language media alot - so there's lots of Lehrer that can be used). If I were to address POV balance - my number-1 priority would be Tokarska-Bakir, and content related to the Church. However these have been a point of contention (e.g. diff) - and the article at present is at a delicate POV balance between involved editors (which is not perfect - but it isn't horrible either) - and is stable in this form so far. Icewhiz (talk) 11:54, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I just want repeat that IMHO hook no.6 is the best. The hook described now as main may contain some negative connotations (perhaps just for me, but flipping a symbol connected to religion like that reminds me of Satanic cross...) and alt 1, about the football fans, is very trivial, and I don't think it is sufficiently researched that most football fans in Poland indeed follow that custom. Other than that, I don't think there are any serious issues remaining in the article, as far as I am concerned. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
There is no point in considering any hook before we get a balanced NPOV article. I pointed out issues above which Icewhiz tried to address but was reverted. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 06:14, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
@Coffeeandcrumbs: - well - actually one sentence did "stick" (so far). However perhaps you could reconsider? I agree that while the NPOV stance of the article be better - it is still within mainstream scholarship (unlike, for instance, Racism in Poland in various recent incarnations). The positive, half-full, outlook of Erica Lehrer is over-represented in regards to the more negative, half-empty, outlook of Joanna Tokarska-Bakir. I will note that Tokarska-Bakir isn't entirely negative, she concludes with : "As far-fetched as this viewpoint may seem, it enables us to see the grotesque practices of the Poles in a different, less irrational light. The ‘Jew with a coin’, protecting the Polish house from which he has been banished, would in this sense be not only a hunting trophy41 or the ‘return of the repressed’, but also a deformed sign of a moral initiation, which the Polish collective consciousness may be preparing for, if it possibly can[5] - it isn't that she disagrees with this aspect, but she stresses this from a more negative vantage point. We also represent all academic viewpoints in the article presently. Even if we are veering more towards Lehrer (note entirely) - we're still within the zone that is exhibited in major and well-received museum exhibitions. I will try to make some other improvements in presentation. Icewhiz (talk) 08:51, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
I did the following edits - which I think address NPOV. We had criticism of Tokarska-Bakir without stating what this criticism was about (Freud). We also failed to mention that our sources of such criticism (Dobrosielski) actually agrees in his conclusion with Tokarska-Bakir. Icewhiz (talk) 10:14, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Considering the article does not seem to be stable at this point (as per Coffee's comments), I will give all editors involved here until August 28 to address all concerns. If any issues remain on that date, the nomination will be closed as unsuccessful. This nomination has been ongoing since May with relatively little meaningful progress taking place since then. If editors here can't get their act together, I just can't see this succeeding at DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:53, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on May 21[edit]

Asplenium fontanum

  • ... that fountain spleenwort does not grow in Amersham churchyard, near a waterfall in northern England or on the castle walls at Alnwick? Source: "Supposed to be now extinct in England; it was once found on Amersham Church ... at a waterfall in either Northumberland or Westmoreland ... once grew on Alnwick Castle; but if so, it is no longer found there."

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 06:21, 27 May 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough and long enough, a QPQ has been completed, and I didn't need Earwig to be satisfied there were no copyright concerns. The article is well-sourced, but some statements are not supported: there is no reference for 2n = 72 or that the 1830s reports of the plant in Britain are dubious. The description section uses a lot of technical terminology which I recommend explaining or linking. As for the hook, it's odd to single out these specific areas which don't seem significant. I suggest reworking it to explain how it was reportedly found in Britain in the late 1830s but is now extinct there. – Teratix 10:29, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@Teratix: What a dreadful description! I have rewritten it. How about ALT1, although I must admit to rather liking ALT0. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:28, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that in the nineteenth century, fountain spleenwort was reported as growing in Britain but is now only found in continental Europe, mainly in mountainous areas?
I prefer this, although I would just cut the bit about its mountainous habitat to be concise, and replace 'continental' with 'Western' to be consistent with the article. Also, could you clarify how the nineteenth-century reports are dubious? – Teratix 09:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Cwmhiraeth, Teratix, where does this nomination stand? It's been well over a month since the most recent post here. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:20, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • It is only my opinion that the hook should be trimmed, but it must be consistent with the article and the claim the nineteenth-century reports are doubtful must be sourced or removed, as it seems to be mere editorialising. – Teratix 01:38, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • @Teratix: I have trimmed the hook, but we need to keep "continental Europe" because Britain is part of "Western Europe". I have removed the phrase in the article about the British sightings being dubious. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:12, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • So change "Western Europe" in the article to "continental Europe". – Teratix 05:34, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I think "Western Europe" is a more natural wording. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:00, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
So, which is it? – Teratix 10:38, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Well, it is both, but "Western Europe" means the western part of Europe as opposed to "Eastern Europe". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:34, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
If both are correct, why not just pick one and stick with it? – Teratix 11:46, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Western Europe is correct for the article because the fern is found in the western part of Europe, continental Europe is right for the hook because it emphasizes that it grows in continental Europe but not in the island group of Britain. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • If the hook used "Western Europe" it would be clear from context it meant "Western continental Europe" (not including Britain), as it specifies directly beforehand that the plant is not present in Britain. But, yeah, this is a pretty trivial thing to hold up the nomination over, so I'll give it the Symbol confirmed.svg and let the promoter decide what to do. – Teratix 12:36, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I feel that Teratix you've taken all the life out of the hook. Could we go with ALT0 but instead of saying it doesn't grow there, say it "no longer" grows there? Yoninah (talk) 21:07, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • As I previously said, it just seems odd to single out these specific locations with no indication of their relevance (the waterfall isn't even named). As for taking the life out of the hook; some articles just aren't suited to produce incredibly interesting ones for a general audience and you have to do the best you can with what you've got. I will try to think of some more. – Teratix 23:00, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I tend to agree with @Cwmhiraeth and Yoninah:, and I share @BlueMoonset:'s concern about prolonging the review. ALT0 gives us a better picture. Just a comment about 'general audience': There are many subjects that, by themselves, don't appeal to a "general audience", let alone one statement from the given article, i.e.the hook, so we must be careful not to assert personal opinions too strongly when evaluating a hook, as they can reduce a hook to a boring and near meaningless statement. Based on reliable sources and the other criteria, the article, and Cwmhiraeth's original ALT0, is good to go. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 16:24, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 2[edit]

Rugg/Feldman benchmarks

Created by Maury Markowitz (talk). Self-nominated at 11:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

Reviewed Hells Bells.

I think of the various hooks, ALT1 is the most "hooky" and likely the best? Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Maury Markowitz: New and long enough, QPQ done. This is an interesting topic that is treated in a thorough manner. However, I have concerns about the sourcing of this article. Nearly all of the article is a summary of the four articles that originally proposed various versions of the benchmarks, which is sourced solely to those four articles. Most of the other sources (refs 13–19) are sources that use the benchmarks but do not discuss them in depth, and are solely used in the "Use" section. (It's also unclear what the source for the "Sample results" section is.)
Now, for DYK the threshold to be met is WP:V and not WP:N. Still, the former says "Articles must be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." While the provided sources seem reliable in the sense of being trustworthy for providing accurate information, the use of primary sources is very excessive given that they're limited to a single section in an article of this length. I would like to see independent sources used more broadly in the article, preferably one(s) that explicitly outline the historical context of the benchmarks, before I can pass this article. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 18:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
@Antony-22: So it seems you agree that the sources are "reliable" and have a "reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". If I am reading your post correctly, your concern is about the "independent" part, is that correct? If so, I believe you are mis-applying the term. The goal of independent sources is to "protect the project from people using Wikipedia for self-promotion, personal financial benefit, and other abuses". Do you see anything of that sort here?
What I really think you're saying it relies too heavily on primary sources. This tends to be more blurry and every editor has their own view on this. However, the guideline is very clear that primary sources are OK as long as there "careful thought and some extra knowledge on the part of Wikipedia's editors." Do you believe I have failed to perform due diligence in this regard?
The reason for both of these guidelines is to protect the Wiki from being overrun by highly biased material. Do you believe this article about a benchmark that has not been used for 35 years is highly biased? Maury Markowitz (talk) 19:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
@Maury Markowitz: I don't believe there's any self-promotion or malice of any kind here, and just to be clear I'm definitely not accusing you of anything unsavory. My concern is that I don't think that a paper by the original proposers of an idea can be considered independent, and I have trouble concluding that an article based almost entirely on such sources is within policy. Usually I just comment on overuse of first-party sources and let it slide, but this is more excessive than other cases I've seen. So I'm not looking for a significant rewrite, just some improvement. Ideally it would be nice if there were, say, a citation to a review on the history of benchmarks that discusses this benchmark in context. (In any case, missing citations in the "Programs" and "Sample results" section still need to be addressed.) Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 21:35, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 3[edit]

Kang Woo-kyu

  • ... that Kang Woo-kyu was a fighter for Korean independence during the Japanese colonial period? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

Created by Won96 (talk). Self-nominated at 08:45, 3 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Won96: Hey, I've given a bit of polish to the hook. The article is a strong start but it needs a bit of copyediting. (I've also done some to the hook, adding a link.) I don't think I'm the right person for the job, though, since I'm not a topic expert and I don't speak Korean. While the article is new enough out of mainspace, long enough and has a good density of citations, I strongly advise you to take it to WP:GOCE and have someone with more familiarity with Korean copyedit this for you. Raymie (tc) 18:28, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Since the above review, now over a month and a half old, the article has been moved from "Kang Woo Kyu" to "Kang Woo-kyu" (I've just adjusted the template accordingly; it should not itself be moved!), but it was never submitted to the Guild of Copy Editors (at WP:GOCER) and has since been tagged as needing a copyedit. It cannot be approved at DYK without that copyedit, so I strongly suggest that it be submitted there at once. I have pinged Won96's talk page; hopefully they will see this, as they haven't edited on Wikipedia for about six weeks, since before the copyedit tag was added to the article. (Note: requests at GOCE average about three weeks to get done; articles tagged by others typically take four to five months to be selected and completed.) Best of luck! BlueMoonset (talk) 01:46, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Guild of Copy Editors have finished their copy edit. Needs another look and review. -- Thats Just Great (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 4[edit]

String Quartet in A major (Bliss)

Arthur Bliss
Arthur Bliss
  • ... that the String Quartet in A major was composed in 1913 while Arthur Bliss (pictured) was an undergraduate but like his other pre-war chamber music, was suppressed and not revived until the 1990s?

Created by Graham1973 (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 06:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg — Several sentences and an entire paragraph lack citations. Second sentence in lede, pertaining to the hook, is not cited. Also, anything summarized in the lede should be covered in the body of text. i.e. The word "suppressed" occurs in the lede, but the body of text only mentions "withdrawn", making it a bit unclear that this is the "suppressed" referred to in the lede. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 21:00, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, some citations seem to be in the middle of the sentence rather than at the end, and I could move those, but we really need @Graham1973: to deal with the uncited paragraph, and whether "suppressed" is the best word to use. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
Having looked further at the article, the sources are largely online, but I am not going to attempt to improve the referencing. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:11, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg The sources check out, but there may be an issue with Sam Ellis' thesis, concerning whether it was published by a reputable publisher, per reliable source eligibility. Recently I was involved with such an issue regarding one of my DYK nominations. I've seen many sources used to pass a DYK nomination that seemed less reliable, but depending on the reviewer, this source may pose issues. We'll need more opinions on that note. Sorry I can't be of any further help at this time. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:36, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
I've started a discussion over at WP:RSN regarding the thesis part. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:51, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
The source in question here is a Doctoral Thesis, and such sources were deemed somewhat reliable in this RSN discussion. There still may be issues with its publishing, however. Good luck. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:07, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
I have just made a comment at WP:RSN, also quoting the same earlier discussion as Narutolovehinata5 does here. I would consider the PhD thesis reliable - however, I note in checking the references to the thesis that it actually says "He composed a String Quartet in A major in about 1913, his final year at Cambridge. ... The first public performance of the quartet was given on 9 June 1914 at Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge: it can be safely classified, therefore, as a student work," [my emphasis]. The hook above leaves out "about", and just says "in 1913".
More to the point, it seems to me, is whether the reference for the "withdrawal" or the "suppression" of the work is reliable? It comes from a review of a 2019 performance in Seen and Heard International, which states that the information is based on the programme notes. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:06, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

I have left Graham one final message inviting him to return to the nomination. If there is no response in a week, the nomination will be marked for closure. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Carlton le Willows Academy

Improved to Good Article status by Curlymanjaro (talk). Self-nominated at 21:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg recently promoted to GA, no copyvio, long enough, well cited, no plagiarism concerns. May not need QPQ? Primary hook is awkwardly worded and not cited in the article; ALT1 is not especially interesting.Kenirwin/(talk) 23:30, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Guess you're right, although I did quite like ALT1. How about this:
  • ALT2:... that Carlton le Willows Academy was opened in 1956 by Sir John Wolfenden, whose report, first recommending the decriminalisation of homosexuality in Britain, was published a year later? Source: Association of Education Committees (1956). British Education Index. 108. London: Councils and Education Press. p. 1000. OCLC 225906831.
@Curlymanjaro: ALT2 works for me. Needs QPQ review -- please complete a review and note it here. -Kenirwin/(talk) 15:30, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 5[edit]

Digital media use and mental health

A young boy engaged with a smartphone
A young boy engaged with a smartphone

Improved to Good Article status by E.3 (talk) and Farang Rak Tham (talk). Nominated by E.3 (talk) at 20:00, 6 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Although above my name is listed as an editor, I only did the GA review, and am therefore sufficiently independent to do a DYK review.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol confirmed.svg You are linking to sections within the article. I don't think that is possible for a DYK. If you insist, I can check with some admin, but I have never seen anyone do it. Also, ALT3 is too long. A DYK entry can't exceed 200 characters. For ALT1, I couldn't find the part in the wiki article where it says that the Goldlocks hypothesis is related to avoiding depressive symptoms and promoting overall wellbeing. So please adjust the wiki article, or remove this hook. For ALT2, the wiki article doesn't state that there is controversy about the word, just that its usefulness has been questioned. In ALT3, it is not clear what is the cause and what is the effect you are describing when you say causality. Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:29, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Fixed Thanks @Farang Rak Tham: I removed those ones as the hook is too hard to explain with the small amount of words. I would prefer it if it could link to the section of the article. The inline citations are in the articles, is that sufficient? Thanks --E.3 (talk) 04:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that. I removed the section links --E.3 (talk) 11:35, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came here from the notice at WT:DYK. If you're talking about linking social media to social media addiction and video games to video game addiction in ALT0, it's not logical, because people will think the links refer to social media and video games. Anyway, ALT0 is not written like a standard hook, in one sentence. Re ALT2, the first piped link should not be piped at all. The target article is already linked at the end of the hook. ALT4 seems like the most viable hook to me. Yoninah (talk) 12:10, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that. I consider a version of ALT0 to be the most interesting, I edited based on this comment, and have made an ALT5 if it is more appropriate. Happy for any hook though. Thanks! --E.3 (talk) 12:25, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • You need to write the hook as one sentence, like:
  • ALT5a: ... that because females are more likely to overuse social media, and males video games, forms of problematic digital media use are likely not singular, simple phenomena?
  • But really, that's not "hooky". ALT4 has more potential IMO. Yoninah (talk) 12:28, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks Yoninah for the valuable comments.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Approving ALT4. Main hook, ALT5 or ALT5a can be approved if you merge the two sentences, as is already done in ALT5a, and make the hook more catchier. Try using more lay language, less scholarly.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 12:46, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks both for that. I changed ALT5a now. I think its "hooky" because most of the research so far has predominantly focused on gaming disorder whereas social media overuse appears to affect females more. --E.3 (talk) 12:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @E.3: it is not good form to edit the hooks after they have been approved. @Farang Rak Tham: if you have any qualms about the hook language, why are you giving it an approval tick? Yoninah (talk) 13:09, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • OK, I see that Farang Rak Tham has only approved ALT4. E.3 ALT5a, like ALT5, still has scholarly language that will not "hook" casual readers, so I'm striking it. Let's just proceed with ALT4. Yoninah (talk) 13:11, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Many apologies about the lack of form, first DYK and edit conflict, no worries with ALT4, thanks a lot! --E.3 (talk) 13:16, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────Yoninah, since I approved only one hook, and crossed out the others, it seems to me I am following guidelines. Let me know if you do see a problem, and I can learn more.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 21:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

  • No, everything you did was good, Farang Rak Tham. I was having trouble following the thread of what happened after your approval, and made my first post in error. You left the template with all unapproved hooks struck, and the nominator came back and added one. Thank you for your work. Yoninah (talk) 22:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
  • It has become a complicated thread indeed. Thanks for responding to my questions and helping us out here, Yoninah. And thanks for processing the DYKs i did in the last months. Other language wikipedias are much less accomodating to religious subjects in DYKs, so I am happy with you and others' help here.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg I pulled this from queue and re-opened the nomination. There needs to be a new, uninvolved reviewer go over this. Farang Rak Tham was the GA reviewer, and is listed as one of the article's editors. In fact, the article history shows they made 46 edits. The DYK reviewer needs to be a different editor. Thanks. — Maile (talk) 00:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Maile66, could you please provide me with a link to a guideline or policy that states a GA reviewer cannot review a DYK? So I can read up and prevent mistakes next time. Thank you.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
It also seems to me that Yoninah has approved of the hook alt4, and he is even more independent than me.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 08:46, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I said I liked it; I didn't review it. Yoninah (talk) 11:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Farang Rak Tham Supplementary guidelines-Rules for evaluating other people's hooks and articles "H2: You're not allowed to approve your own hook or article, nor may you review an article if it's a recently listed Good Article that you either nominated or reviewed for GA (though you can still nominate it for DYK). DYK novices are strongly discouraged from confirming articles that are subject to active arbitration remedies, as are editors active in those areas. Use common sense here, and avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. A valid DYK nomination will readily be confirmed by a neutral editor." — Maile (talk) 11:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg So if I understand correctly, this nomination needs to be posted again under the appropriate date on the nominations page, which I suspect will be June, 6th. Apologies, E.3.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 13:30, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
You are correct, and it is already reposted on June 6. — Maile (talk) 15:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I feel that I should first note that multiple-sentence hooks are allowed (per I2 WP:DYKIN) though such are exceedingly rare.
  • While doing a light copy edit, I noticed there is an open-ended quotation in the third sentence of section Digital technology use in mental health care. There were also a couple places where the ellipsis should have been in square brackets [...] to show it was edited and not part of the actual quotation.
  • Symbol confirmed.svgApprove ALT4 Article passed GA on the day of the nomination, is long enough, neutral, and well cited. Spot check of online citations is good; AGF for offline sources. No copyvio or close paraphrasing detected. QPQ verified. The image file is tagged with a CC licence, interesting, discernible at low resolution, is in the article and encyclopedically illustrative. (Although technically, the picture is of a child while the hook mentions youths.) ALT4 is well formatted, neutral, and of a reasonable length. The first clause (up to the comma) is from a review in Nature (I verified the source and copied the citation from the end of the paragraph to the end of that sentence). The second clause is cited early in the article "correlations between technology overuse and mental health problems becoming apparent". I feel there's enough separation and qualifiers there that it avoids WP:SYNTH, and the general trend of research for rule H3: "The hook should refer to established facts that are not likely to change". The hook is broadly interesting (esp. to online readers). I feel that the phrasing might be improved slightly, but I see no reason not to pass it now. – Reidgreg (talk) 02:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg reopening this, as I raised a query at WT:DYK, but the hook is due to go live in less than an hour so no time to discuss. Issue is: TRM has raised the issue that the hook implies that the report into media use by disadvantaged kids was described as "overuse", whereas the source for that research makes no such claim. The hook was approved with a note that it didn't look like WP:SYNTH, but I think I'd disagree with that. The second part of the hook directly references the first, and states a cause and effect that no individual source has mentioned. I'm tempted to pull this one before it goes live at 12:00 UTC today, to allow more time for discussion on this and possibly a better hook. Unless anyone has a strong reason why the above issue is incorrect. Pinging Reidgreg, Maile66, Yoninah, Farang Rak Tham, E.3 who were involved in this one. The text of TRM's finding on this is: the report doesn't describe the level used by disadvantaged kids as "overuse" so nor should we. Plus it's a bit of a non-hook because "may affect their mental health" works both ways, indeed, the report highlights the fact that "a growing body of research conducted over the past decade suggests that time online can actually benefit young people." Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

I am the GA reviewer, so I have no business approving any hooks at this point per discussion above. Good luck with it though.--Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 18:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
I think there was quite a few reviewers that were happy with ALT4. However I have tried to address the concerns with some rephrases here. --[E.3][chat2][me] 09:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Also please note that ALT4 isn't suggesting cause and effect, simply that it may or may not affect in a positive or a negative way, and I think that is hooky enough to be interesting. --[E.3][chat2][me] 09:44, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

2019 Tripoli shooting

Tripoli is northern city in Lebanon
Tripoli is northern city in Lebanon

Created by Forest90 (talk). Self-nominated at 18:16, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Comment: I hope accept my new DYK, I worked a lot for creating article
  • Copy edited your ALTs and you should note that ALT1 and ALT2 are too long. -- Thats Just Great (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Forest90, look at the copy edits I made to make sure the footnotes are in the proper numerical order. Please do the others as well. I'll get back to this tomorrow; for now I'm leaning toward the very first hook; simple is best. Drmies (talk) 02:19, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I can already tell you that we are not going to run with that image--that's just a picture of a busy highway. Drmies (talk) 02:20, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 7[edit]

1st Canadian Comedy Awards, Canadian Comedy Awards, List of Canadian comedians, Peameal bacon, Poutine, Made in Canada

Extended content
French fries and cheese curds with gravy
Serving of poutine
  • ... that poutine (pictured) and back bacon on a bun were served while The Beaver was awarded to Made in Canada, clowns, and comedians at the inaugural Canadian Comedy Awards? Hook fact appears in 1st Canadian Comedy Awards. Sources: "the premier Canadian Comedy Awards [...] guests munched on Canadian fare like back bacon on a bun and poutine [...] Rick Mercer was chosen best male performer in a TV comedy for Made in Canada [...] Other awards went to: [...] Mike Kennard and John Turner (a.k.a. Mump and Smoot, although they appeared sans clown face last night); best actor[s]in a comedic play [...] Canada's comic elite were finally able to take home something more tangible than simply the memory of chuckles and guffaws." The Globe and Mail and "Beaver (yup, that's what the award is called)" The Globe and Mail

Created/expanded by Reidgreg (talk). Self-nominated at 23:21, 7 June 2019 (UTC).

Note that not all of the articles are ready for DYK reviews:

All articles ready for DYK review. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:04, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol question.svg@Reidgreg: do you have an image to go with this? Yoninah (talk) 13:09, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Nothing specific. I suppose a picture would balance-out the length of the hook, so good idea! The picture of the trophy at the CCA article is fair use, as is the title card for Made in Canada, so they don't qualify. Commons has plenty of pictures of poutine. (File:Poutine.JPG might be good and appears in the article, though I'm not the best person to judge.) – Reidgreg (talk) 13:53, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Starting review of Peameal bacon, as that's one that hasn't been to GA already --valereee (talk) 14:45, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Peameal bacon GTG: was expanded from 762 characters to 5000+ between Jun 7 and 10, nominated Jun 7, so plenty long and 5x expansion done and nominated in time. I did not find the hook info (that it was served at the first awards) in the article, but I did find that at the awards article, so I’ve added it in +source. There was a minor instance of too-close paraphrasing in the lead, which I fixed. Article is sufficiently sourced, and references appear to be in good shape. The point within the hook that references this article is interesting. --valereee (talk) 15:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Starting review of Poutine, which is another food article so happy to pitch in there, too. --valereee (talk) 15:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Poutine GTG: is long enough and was reviewed for GA June 7, so new enough. There are sufficient citations, at least one per paragraph, and they appear to be in good shape. Once again I did not find the hook point in the article, but again added it. Note to Reidgreg: I think you’re going to need to put the hook point with source into each of the other articles in order for them to be bolded rather than simply linked. Fixed an instance of too-close paraphrasing. Point within the hook that references this article is interesting. Article is stable. Image of Poutine is properly licensed and used in article. --valereee (talk) 16:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee: I added a picture from poutine to the nomination, if you wouldn't mind checking it as well. Thanks. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:05, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Could I have a third opinion on the bolded note above? Rule H5 requires the hook fact to be cited in the [main] article, but it isn't clear if the hook fact must be present in every bolded article of a multiple-article hook. I don't mind the addition of the hook fact to the above articles (poutine, peameal bacon), but it might seem trivial or out of place in the other secondary articles (Made in Canada, List of Canadian comedians, Canadian Comedy Awards). – Reidgreg (talk) 17:05, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Reidgreg, I'm not interpreting it to mean all the articles have to be connected somehow with all the other articles, just that the point in the hook (that poutine was served at this awards dinner, for instance) would need to be mentioned in both articles, and so on. Poutine doesn't need to go into any of the other articles. It just needs to be in the poutine article that they were served at the awards, and in the awards article that poutine was served. Winning a Beaver would need to be mentioned in the Made in Canada article, and the fact Made in Canada won a Beaver in the awards article. But the Made in Canada article doesn't need to mention poutine, and vice versa. But maybe I'm wildly off base here! --valereee (talk) 17:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I've added the image check to the poutine review --valereee (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Ah, good!  CCA has "The Beaver" and comedians, the List refers to CCA, you've fixed the food articles, and MIC refers to this article and CCAs.  This main article is the only one with the complete hook fact. – Reidgreg (talk) 17:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Valereee: the hook fact only needs to be mentioned and sourced in one of the articles. @Reidgreg: great picture! Yoninah (talk) 17:40, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Yoninah, even if both articles are bolded? What's the difference in requirements between a bolded article and a linked article, just that they've both been through review? They don't need to be connected to one another via a hook that is sourced in each? It seems like when someone goes to a bolded article and doesn't see anything that connects it to the hook, they'd wonder why. ETA: er, not arguing, just trying to get my own understanding straight. :) --valereee (talk) 17:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@Valereee: the hook fact has to appear in only one bolded article in the hook, even if there are 30 bolded articles! I don't understand your question about linked articles; they are not subject to DYK review. Yoninah (talk) 19:50, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Reidgreg:@Valereee: There is too much linking going on in the hook. The "clowns" link looks like a link to Clown, not to the award winner. I suggest deleting that. Linking to "comedians" as List of Canadian comedians is also confusing; was the award given to all the comedians in the list? I would suggest doing a different hook for List of Canadian comedians and writing the hook this way:
  • ALT1: ... that poutine (pictured) and back bacon on a bun were served while The Beaver was awarded to Made in Canada at the inaugural Canadian Comedy Awards? Sources per ALT0 Yoninah (talk) 19:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Comment: My idea was for "Made in Canada, clowns and comedians" to read without the comma, as if "Made in Canada" was a compound modifier applied to "clowns and comedians", like another way of saying Canadian clowns and Canadian comedians. (About 20 people on that list received awards at the 1st CCAs; less than 5% of the list. Mump and Smoot are regarded as the most-famous Canadian clown duo, so Canadian clowns → Mump and Smoot.) I'm open to ALT1 but would like to see how the rest of the reviews go. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • @Reidgreg: OK, but that compound modifier thing isn't clear at all. I'll try to review the rest of the hooks if someone doesn't beat me to it. Yoninah (talk) 20:46, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I may help later today or tomorrow, - please clarify in the list of 6 above what's already under review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:17, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
    I checked the completed reviews; so far no editor has specifically stated an intention to review any of the last four. – Reidgreg (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
    Symbol voting keep.svg for Made in Canada, substantial GA on good sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:31, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
    Symbol confirmed.svg for Canadian Comedy Awards, substantial expansion on good sources, no copyvio obvious. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:46, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Review of List of Canadian comedians: 5x expansion verified. New enough, long enough, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. QPQ done. However, the material which constitutes the lead is unorganized and jumps from topic to topic. I suggest writing a more general lead (see hidden note in edit window) and then breaking the rest up into subsections. After "Types of humour", though, I was unable to find a logical sequence; it all seems like a mish-mash.
  • As mentioned above, I don't think this page should be included in the multi-hook nomination, and neither should the non-bolded "clowns" directing to Mump and Smoot. Please suggest a different hook for this article. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:33, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Review of 1st Canadian Comedy Awards: 5x expansion verified, new enough, long enough, well referenced, neutrally written, no close paraphrasing seen. QPQ done. All of the citations for the hook are found in this article, and hook refs are verified and cited inline. Image is freely licensed. Good to go. Yoninah (talk) 23:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Comments: I wonder about the article name, why "1st", not "First"? I also suggest you write a short lead and have a new section below. The names of collagues of someone who won in two categories seems no lead material. - General: I'd collapse the navbox in all articles, at least until there's more blue. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
    • The ordinal (1st) in the title seems to be the convention with these sorts of articles (e.g. 1st Academy Awards). It probably makes it easier for listing/navigation, and to keep the title from becoming unwieldy. When I ran an intitle search with "first" I mostly found things like First Novelist Award which is for an artist's debut work (i.e. first novels written by authors, not the first year the award was given). Some list by the year, but this can become ambiguous and confusing (between the eligibility year, the year the award was given, if the ceremony ever skipped a year for some reason, or if the eligibility period does not coincide with a calendar year).
    I noted the colleagues who shared that award because it wasn't written out anywhere else in prose. The lead looks a little long compared to the prose in some sections, but it's also summarizing a lot of tables. (I feel like it would get a bit redundant if all the information in tables was also written out in prose.)
    I collapsed the nav template. (I have drafts for ceremonies 2–19 which I was going to move to mainspace when this passed, but I recently gained access to the ProQuest database and want to flesh them out with additional sources first.) – Reidgreg (talk) 12:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────For List of Canadian comedians, I agree with Yoninah's edits, it was too long for a lead and works much better with sections. Being very general, it was intended to show how the realities of the country (culture, audiences, climate, industry) shape its comedians, and what distinguishes Canadian comedians from those of other countries. I'll try to write a lead and organize it in that vein. I'm not sure anything stands out as hook-worthy. I have a couple sources which say something along the lines of "Canada produces more [notable] comedians per capita than any other country in the world", which I feel is broadly interesting, but they aren't high-quality sources for census-type information like that, and I didn't include it in the article as I felt it was likely to be challenged. (Census information I did find grouped comedians with actors, so I couldn't resolve it as a distinct profession.) If we can't think of a good hook, I'm fine with dropping it, but please keep the QPQ credit for the review. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:50, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

  • @Reidgreg: no problem. I'm sure we can come up with a good hook after you fix up the article. We could leave this template open until that's resolved.
  • Symbol confirmed.svg ALT1 is simply a shorter version of ALT0, and since all five articles have been checked and verified, ALT1 is good to go. I have struck List of Canadian comedians from the DYK credit lines. Yoninah (talk) 13:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
    • ALT2B: ... that Canada's comedians, along with its singers and musicians, are considered to be the country's cultural representatives?" Source: "working-class individuals [...] idea of Canada's cultural best is more likely to include the Canadian comedians who have frequented American television shows such as Saturday Night Live (Dan Akroyd, Mike Myers) or rock groups such as Rush [...] or more recently internationally famous performers such as Shania Twain or Celine Dion" Anthropologica (source offline). It's not in the article yet, but does that sound hook-worthy? Oh, the "more likely" part in the source is comparing what is broadly popular to what is traditionally chosen from the fine arts by the elite. Feel free to suggest changes. – Reidgreg (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I think the hook is good. Are you going to create a lead paragraph too? I'm not very familiar with list articles but you should probably summarize the major points there. I'll take a look at this once this is done. Overall, this is ripe for promotion. MX () 17:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Good job on the expansion, Reidgreg! The presentation looks much better now and the lead reads well. I suggest writing the hook this way:
Two comedians dressed as Mounties apprehend the host of a TV show
Wayne and Shuster with Ed Sullivan
  • ALT2c: ... that Canadians consider their comedians (Wayne and Shuster pictured), along with their singers and musicians, to be the country's cultural representatives?
  • Symbol voting keep.svg Offline hook ref AGF and cited inline. Rest of my review above. ALT2c good to go. Yoninah (talk) 20:08, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
    • I like ALT2c. Fixed the TOC and section headers, and added a bunch of images, all marked with free licenses. I tried to use performance images, and then added a few others where there were gaps. I tried to balance the columns and images as best I could, hopefully it doesn't look too bad at different screen widths. I might go back to crop a photo so it'll display better, but I'm pretty happy with it. – Reidgreg (talk) 23:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol confirmed.svg@Reidgreg: nice job on the images. Confirming that all images are freely licensed. What do you think about adding the Wayne and Schuster image to this nomination? From a design point of view, the images do look a bit too big. Are they default 200px? Yoninah (talk) 09:49, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
      • I set the long skinny picture of Katherine Ryan to 150px. The others are all 'thumb's, which I believe sets the width according to the user preferences and browser platform. The Wayne & Shuster picture certainly fits the hook, and I was really pleased to find it. Have added it to ALT2c, above. I used an ampersand to keep the caption short; are the caption and the (pictured) note sufficient? Also cropped the picture of Candy Palmater in the article. – Reidgreg (talk) 12:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Thank you. The image is freely licensed. I edited the caption and "(pictured)" part. ALT2c good to go with image. Yoninah (talk) 13:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Returned from prep. Several alts have been proposed at WT:DYK#Prep 3. Let's get the hook into shape and approved before promotion. It would be great to run this with the Wayne and Shuster image, but the hook has to connect to it. Pinging @Reidgreg:. Yoninah (talk) 17:13, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
    Going to list the hooks here:
    • ALT0: ... that many working-class Canadians consider their comedians, along with their singers and musicians, to be the country's cultural representatives?
      • ... that Canadians popularly consider their cultural best to include comedians?
    • ALT1: ... that Canadian comedians use individual expression to reinforce collective values?
    • ALT2: ... that to be social acceptable, some Canadian comedians link comedic discontent to group survival?
    • ALT3: ... that in Canada, comedians face taboos regarding immodesty, impoliteness, and social criticism?
    • ALT4: ... that the dangers of Canada's vast and sparsely populated climate have given rise to dark and fatalistic humour on the part of Canadian comedians?
    I have a quote from a comedy historian that "[Canadian] comedians have long been a source of national pride" but I was trying to keep the article short and generalized and was avoiding quotes. There were also quotes that "Canada produces more notable comedians per capita than any other country" but I would not consider the sources reliable for that kind of data and was unable to find census data to back it up. (Although comparing with the lists for other countries, Canada certainly has more Wikipedia articles on comedians per capita.)
    I feel the Wayne & Shuster picture worked when the hook was about Canada's cultural representatives to the world. I'm not so sure about the other hooks. I suppose if we expanded something like The Canadian Conspiracy and did a hook about Canadian comedians taking over the US, the picture could fit that. Or we could just save the picture for the Wayne & Shuster articles. – Reidgreg (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Reidgreg: it does seem to me that you wrote this article very sketchily; perhaps you were just busy with all the other articles you were nominating. If you were to expand any of the sections with examples, rather than generalities, I think you could come up with better hooks. Yoninah (talk) 19:57, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
    • My feeling was that the prose should be just enough to introduce the list, and what distinguishes Canadian comedians from other comedians. I didn't want to go down the path of examples – although I could see doing that in a history section after writing some missing articles for the early history. I'm not really interested in further expanding the article at this time.
    • I did some more reading about cultural representatives and representative culture and found that there are differing, and sometimes conflicting, definitions. In line with my conception is the following definition: The vicarious actions undertaken by individual, exceptional persons either for, on behalf of, or acting as proxy for the other members of the group in question or society (or even the whole human race).UC Press Canadians identify with their sense of humour but cannot always express it; comedians are the exceptional individuals with artistic talent who can express the cultural ideas and ideals of humour, and represent this aspect of the culture – becoming the group's cultural representatives, eh? Does that make sense? The article touches on this in a few places and the lead summarizes it. – Reidgreg (talk) 22:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
    • @Yoninah: are any of the hooks interesting and passable enough? If not, is there something specific that should be done to move this forward? – Reidgreg (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Extended content
  • Note to promoter: There are 2 separate hooks on this page, ALT1 which is scheduled for a special occasion appearance on July 1, and ALT2c. Please leave this template open after promoting one so the other will still be available for promotion. Or, promote them at the same time! Thank you, Yoninah (talk) 20:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
I have promoted ALT1 without the image to Prep 3. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:49, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 8[edit]

William R. Crawford Jr.

Created by Bejinhan (talk). Self-nominated at 16:18, 8 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg New enough, long enough.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Neutral, well-cited, no copyright violation detected.
  • I standardized the layout. The lede is too short.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I didn't know lede length is a requirement in WP:DYK... but I've expanded it into a brief summary of the article. Bejinhan talks 18:14, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks. ALT1 is better. Interesting to a broad audience. QPQ done. I cannot double-check the offline book, but I assume good faith and there are other references about his father anyway. Good to go!Zigzig20s (talk) 18:29, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks! I've struck out the first suggestion. Bejinhan talks 19:00, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Returning from prep for a better hook per discussion at WT:DYK. Yoninah (talk) 00:30, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah, Cwmhiraeth, Zigzag20s, and Valereee: This nomination has been stuck for several weeks now with no alternative hook proposed. Can we try to discuss formulating a new hook? It was suggested back in the WT:DYK discussion that he took the position as ambassador within four days of the assassination. Would a hook based on that work? Or is a new direction needed? Because right now, I can't really see any option other than the assassination/appointment fact. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
@Zigzig20s:. Leaving this for someone else as I can't access the Washington Post article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
I can get to the WaPo obit, but it doesn't give anything. The Time article that's the source for "immediately" might, but that's one I can't get to. It doesn't look like Bejinhan has edited since June; can we give her another few days? --valereee (talk) 12:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't see any "immediately" in the New York Times source. Here is an alt:
  • ALT2: ... that William R. Crawford Jr., a 30-year veteran of the US Foreign Service, was exposed to foreign cultures as a youth living with his professor-father in France, Brazil, and Chile? Yoninah (talk) 22:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Sounds good. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:02, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
It's a bit boring. Many diplomats grow up OCONUS.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
True, but I don't think that's common knowledge and it might still be appealing to the average reader. Another option could be to go with ALT2, but mentioning his posts in Yemen and Cyprus as well for contrast purposes. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:58, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
What was wrong with ALT1 please?Zigzig20s (talk) 10:01, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
Well, after ambassadors are assassinated, they're usually replaced. Yoninah (talk) 10:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
We are at an impasse. There is nothing interesting about his OCONUS background; it's just another celebration of social status. Did he achieve anything extraordinary that could be found in the public domain?Zigzig20s (talk) 10:22, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg We are not at an impasse. We are trying to write something hooky about someone who is not very hooky, using "compare and contrast" hook wording. ALT1 has plenty of hook interest. I think we need another set of eyes. Yoninah (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Trust Exercise (novel)

Created by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 12:28, 8 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg A new hook is probably needed: it is not uncommon for authors to be mad while writing, and the hook lacks context as to how her case is special. In addition, the article needs a copyedit due to grammatical errors and typos. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 How is this hook?___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
It sounds like a rather bland hook sadly, even if it was reworded into a more succinct form of English. Give me a day or two and I'll try to help out with possible alternative hooks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:15, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I apologize for the late reply. While I mostly came up with a blank, I did think of one suggestion: I found it interesting that the book seemed to have been at least partly inspired by both the election of Trump and the author's breakup with her husband. Perhaps a hook based on either or both might work? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:01, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 How is this hook?____CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 09:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg It's a hookier hook, but due to possible BLP concerns as well as the Trump mention I think we may need a second opinion on its appropriateness. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 9[edit]

Ivan Golunov

Created by Kirill Samredny (talk) and Alexander Davronov (talk). Nominated by Anomalous+0 (talk) at 14:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. No QPQ needed here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I find the article very one-sided and hardly start-class. It seems to have been written for the express purpose of reporting a news story. I removed the POV language and would like to see some response from the police, not just that they were forced to back down. If more information about the subject, Golunov, is not available and he is in fact a WP:1E subject, you may want to rename the page for a broader study of the arrests and allegations of police abuse of power. Yoninah (talk) 20:41, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • It has been over 3 weeks since my post. If these issues are not addressed by August 20, this nomination will be closed as unsuccessful. Yoninah (talk) 00:28, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Hi! Thanks for your efforts and attention. I believe we can close this nomination safely. The article still needs additional polishing, fixing some things, and adding others.
may want to rename the page
The subject's (Golunov) case was primarily documented to make a record of at least one case of a long range of serious rights violations related to made-up drug-charges in Russia. The case drew a lot attention from the public and may not be overlooked. I would be good basis to refer to when writing article about Human Rights situation in Russia generally.
and would like to see some response from the police
Well the police dropped charges due to lack of credible evidences and there is also continuing investigation against cops. So there is almost nothing to say about that. Except of course that 2 colonels were fired after reveal of fake charges. DAVRONOVA.A. 15:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Alexander Davronov: OK, I looked at it again and did some editing to bring it up to start-class. The only problem I see is the referencing. This is not the Russian Wikipedia; the sources should be formatted with "trans-title" titles so we English speakers can understand what they say. I formatted some of the English ones. Please see WP:Citation templates. Yoninah (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: the sources should be formatted Yeah I know. I've primarily contributed to the preamble and didn't touch the rest of the article. Almost all sources I've used are in English. The rest of the article was written by another Russian guy who used Russian sources. I hope he will fix the rest. DAVRONOVA.A. 07:35, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 10[edit]

Vicky Knight

  • ALT2: ... that Vicky Knight has said that all the tears she wept during the production of her debut film were real?
  • ALT3: ... that in an interview with BBC, Vicky Knight said that her debut film has changed her life completely?
  • ALT4: ... that Vicky Knight, who played an acid-attack victim in her debut film role, set up a charity to help burns victims?
  • ALT5: ... that the actress Vicky Knight also works as a healthcare assistant in the hospital were she was treated as a child?

Created/expanded by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 23:40, 10 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Length and currency: 1529 prose characters, so just meets the threshold; new enough.
  • Sourced: All claims in the article are sourced.
  • Hook: There is no mention of the subject having breakdowns on set in the article text, and it seems exploitative to use a living person's physical injuries and mental health issues to get DYK clicks in any case.
  • Article: Poorly composed and has grammatical errors. It only mentions the subject being in a fire and her role in one film; there is no other information at all, not even a date or year of birth, place of birth, etc.
  • Copyvio: The text is ok, Earwig pick up the quotes, but they have been cited. The image is not Creative Commons and is under discussion as a likely CopyVio.
  • QPQ: done
  • Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg I don't think this should go through because the article is not complete or well-rounded enough, Rule D7. A biography should do more than just mention two events (the fire and the film role) that the subject was involved with. I'll leave it for a second opinion though.Felixkrater (talk) 05:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Coming here for a second opinion. I have to agree that the state of the article is not good enough for DYK at this time. Even if you do ignore the content issues, right now there are several typos and grammatical errors, meaning the article needs a copyedit. But more importantly, there seems to be too much weight given to the fire incident, while almost ignoring other aspects about her life and career. Thus, I have to concur with Felix's concerns regarding D7. @CAPTAIN MEDUSA: I will give you ten days to address the article issues; the nomination will be marked for closure as unsuccessful if you will be unable to do so. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:11, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Narutolovehinata5, I am working on it. Give me one more day.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:05, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Thanks. Pinging Felixkrater to return to the nomination to complete the review. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:56, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Note that I am opposed to the currently proposed hook due to BLP concerns. A more neutral hook is needed. Narutolovehinata5 tc csdnew 00:57, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
How about, "that Vicky Knight has said that all the tears she wept during the production of her debut film were real"? DS (talk) 22:31, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @CAPTAIN MEDUSA:, @Narutolovehinata5:, I have had another look and have copy edited it re grammar and writing style, but there are still a number of problems:
  • CopyVio The image used is not under Creative Commons license and it is under discussion as a likely copyright vio.
  • Incomplete information -
  • 1. It says she was named "Student of the Year", but no mention of which FE College she went to, or what she studied.
  • 2. You mention a Ronnie Springer who saved the children, but no mention of who he was. I think he was one of the pub's customers from one of your sources, but you need to say and ref that; just naming someone with no explanation of who they are creates confusion.
  • 3. You have given a year of birth, but you don't make it specifically clear how old she was when the fire happened, and you don't specifically say that it was her cousins who were killed in the fire, although all of this info is given in the sources you found. This is important, basic info. You need to flesh the story about the pub fire a bit more - it looks a bit odd to just say "she fell asleep" in the pub, when she was staying, or being baby-sat, or living (which one?) with her grandfather. Were the children alone in the flat?
  • 4. I heard her being interviewed on the BBC a few weeks ago, and her "day job" is working as a care assistant in the hospital burns unit where she was treated. I think that is important info that should be included. It is probably in your sources, or you could do further research to find a source.
  • Hook - As already noted, the hook is exploitative and too negative. The one suggested by DS above is also too negative. Something around the charity she set up, or the fact that she works where she was treated would be better.
  • Final point - Can you please spend more time preparing your articles before nominating them for DYK. English doesn't seem to be your first language, so with any article you write, you need to get someone you know to review it or ask the Project Guild of Editors to look at it. Felixkrater (talk) 08:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Felixkrater, all of the issues have been fixed.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 20:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi @CAPTAIN MEDUSA:, that is much better. I've given it another copy edit and added ALT4 and ALT5 hooks above. I'm not sure about leaving the photo in the article when it hasn't been confirmed that it is fair use. I'll leave this now for someone else to approve or comment on. Felixkrater (talk) 06:44, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to complete the review here; previous reviewer is leaving this for someone new. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 16[edit]

Chang Liyi

Wreckage of the U-2 piloted by Chang Liyi
Wreckage of the U-2 piloted by Chang Liyi
  • Reviewed: Ethiopian forest brush-furred rat (second of two QPQs)
  • Comment: Source uses the name "Jack Chang", and explains in the footnotes that it's the English nickname of Chang Liyi.

Created by Zanhe (talk). Self-nominated at 20:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article is long enough, and in date. It meets all policies, and is both factual and interesting. Has appeared on ITN, but in the RD section, so still qualifies for DYK. Hook is sourced and cited in article, and supported by source used. AGF on the Chinese language sources used for other parts of the article. Image is PD and shows up well. Just curious, do we know for sure that the one in the image is Chang Liyi's? The article says four U-2s were on display. If his was the only U-2C then de facto it must be his, or if his had the serial number 6-6691. Or it might be in the Chinese sources. But this is just an aside. QPQ has been done, no copyvio issues. Looks good to go! Spokoyni (talk) 16:33, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg @Zanhe: I was planning to promote this, but found the hook too complex to understand. Perhaps you could suggest something different? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:04, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • @Zanhe: are you coming back to this nomination? Yoninah (talk) 00:37, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Sorry I was travelling in July and missed Cwmhiraeth's comment. I will deal with this in the next few days. -Zanhe (talk) 00:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
ALT1 ... that the downing of Chang Liyi (pictured) and other Taiwanese Black Cats prompted the CIA and US Air Force to begin prioritizing the development of drones at Area 51?
Better? (Same article, point, sources as before, so Spokoyni's review should roll over.) — LlywelynII 21:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@LlywelynII: Thanks for your suggestion. It's a great hook, but I'm currently researching materials for Yeh Changti, another Black Cat shot down and captured in China. I plan to expand this into a two-article hook, and will need up to a week to complete the second article. Thanks for your patience everyone! -Zanhe (talk) 23:03, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 18[edit]

Arizona Miner

Created by MB (talk). Self-nominated at 00:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg Article is new enough, long enough, is neutral and generally well sourced. It relies heavily on the Library of Congress' article on the newspaper, a reliable source, but at times copies too much directly from the article - Earwig's copyvio detector shows the problematic sections. There are also a few direct quotes which do not make clear who is being quoted - it appears the quote is from the cited publication, rather than an individual, so would be better reworded to reduce the concerns about similarity. The hook is interesting and appropriate, but it appears that McCormick was not strictly Secretary of State, but held the equivalent position of Territorial Secretary - this could easily be reworded. QPQ has been completed. Warofdreams talk 12:16, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Warofdreams, I ran Earwig again with the direct quotes removed and it says "violation unlikely". I don't see anything else of concern - a few sentence fragments here and there.
The second quote "combative and racist perspective that made itself known through his often aggressive and biting criticism of others" is from the LOC article and is attributed, by the citation, to the article (not to any individual).
The third quote, within this sentence: Marion intended the Miner to be both "The Official Paper of Arizona" and an "Organ of the White People of Arizona." are the words of author Lyon and the quote is cited to his book.
The first quote comes from this: "According to William H. Lyon in Those Old Yellow Dog Days: Frontier Journalism in Arizona, 1859-1912, McCormick established the paper as 'the creature of the new territorial government.'" I'm not sure from this if "the creature of the new territorial government" was said by McCormick (maybe) or Lyon (probably). I'm not going to make an assumption. If a reader wants to know more they would have to obtain Lyon's book (which is the citation).
So I don't really see anything that needs to be changed. MB 03:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Your text: "Marion was a "proud Democrat", a heavy drinker with a "combative and racist perspective that made itself known through his often aggressive and biting criticism of others". Marion intended the Miner to be both "The Official Paper of Arizona" and an "Organ of the White People of Arizona." "
The source: "Marion was known for being a proud Democrat, a staunch defender of Arizona, a true "frontier" editor, and his own man; but Marion was also known to be a heavy drinker with a combative and racist perspective that made itself known through his often aggressive and biting criticism of others. Lyon made note of this when he wrote that Marion intended the Miner to be both "The Official Paper of Arizona" and an "Organ of the White People of Arizona." "
This is the biggest example, but there are others. It's easy to accidentally copy too much of the style and order of the original along with appropriately sources quotes, but these definitely need fixing. Warofdreams talk 10:34, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 20[edit]

Johann Schwarzhuber

Schwarzhuber during the Ravensbrück trial
Schwarzhuber during the Ravensbrück trial
  • Comment: Coming up with a "catchy hook" for war criminals is hard, so I am of course open for suggestions and improvements.

Created by Dead Mary (talk). Self-nominated at 09:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The image is appropriately licensed, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. Apart from ALT3, which I have struck, the other hooks are OK and cited inline, and I have added ALT1A as a different way of phrasing ALT1. No QPQ needed here. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:39, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this. I don't see any inline cites for ALT0, 1, 1A or 2. (The inline cite should be right after the sentence with the hook fact.) I also don't see anything about "on-the-spot decisions" in the article. Yoninah (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi Yoninah, thanks for the feedback. Well, the the hooks are a more "engaging"(?) description of the fact, that he oversaw/worked in the Auschwitz selection process in his camp area and in this capacity he decided which prisoners were sent to the gas chambers (killed) and which into the prison camp.
In this position he was also responsible for the selection process, which determined who was sent to the work camps and which prisoners were sent to the gas chambers. Thousands of inmates who were chosen by Schwarzhuber during this process were immediately killed.
Thats sourced in the article (Rudorff (2018), pp. 374, 378. / Langbein (2005), pp. 325-326, 358.). I am not sure how to proceed, should the hooks be worded differently? Should the citation made more clear in the article? Dead Mary (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
@Dead Mary: yes, the hook should be worded differently. The Holocaust was not fun and games. Only the first hook conveys the right tone. Yoninah (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Well ok, here are some different wordings:
ALT4:... that Johann Schwarzhuber decided for thousands of people who was to be killed in the gas chambers and who was to be spared?
ALT5:... that thousands of people were killed, after Johann Schwarzhuber selected them for the gas chambers in Auschwitz?
ALT6:... that Johann Schwarzhuber selected thousands of people in Auschwitz for death in the gas chambers?
ALT7:... that Johann Schwarzhuber chose thousands of people in Auschwitz, who were then killed in the gas chambers?
ALT8:... that Johann Schwarzhuber led the Auschwitz mens's camp, where he selected thousands of people to be killed in the gas chambers?
Dead Mary (talk) 16:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Dead Mary: thank you for the alts, but all of these are trying to be, in your words, a "catchy hook" about a war criminal. The Holocaust is not "catchy". As I said above, only the first hook conveys the right tone. Perhaps something more could be added to the first hook, like that he worked at Auschwitz, to give it a little more hook interest. Yoninah (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
ALT9:... that Johann Schwarzhuber was the leader of the Auschwitz men's camp and sentenced to death during the first Ravensbrück concentration camp trial?
ALT10:... that Johann Schwarzhuber was sentenced to death for his conduct as one of the principal leaders of the Ravensbrück concentration camp?
ALT11:... that Johann Schwarzhuber worked as commander in 4 different concentration camps in Nazi Germany?
ALT12:... that Johann Schwarzhuber led the Auschwitz mens' camp and was sentenced to death for his command of the Ravensbrück concentration camp?
ALT13:... that Johann Schwarzhuber served as commander of the Auschwitz men's camp and was the highest ranking defendant during the first Ravensbrück concentration camp trial?
Dead Mary (talk) 12:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 21[edit]

Oregon House Bill 2020

  • Reviewed: TBD
  • Comment: The situation isn't resolved yet, so this count may change and there might be new hooks added at a later date.

Created by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 07:29, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Green tickY
  • Interesting: Red XN - biased hooks, see comment
  • Other problems: Red XN - It is this reviewer's view that the hooks advocate one side of the issue over the other side of the issue, as such it should not be approved.

QPQ: Red XN - Not done

Overall: Symbol delete vote.svg Please see WP:DYKNOT:

A means of advertising, or of promoting commercial or political causes. While it is fine to cover topics of commercial or political interest, DYK must not provide inappropriate advantage for such causes (e.g. during election campaigns or product launches).

I believe that the author of this article is well intentioned but given the topic is a current political controversy, it shouldn't be approved. RightCowLeftCoast (Moo) 01:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

I have to disagree with the assessment of this article and entry as promoting a political cause. It's reporting on the contents of the bill and its relation with the walkout (which is covered in its own article) and doesn't really have enough detail at the moment to have a substantial lean in either direction. SounderBruce 05:11, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
I also disagree. The hooks are entirely factual and one need not commit bothsidesism to be neutral, they do not advocate for anything. The article is well sourced and not promotional, and that is malfeasance to disapprove due to it being a "controversy", this certainly not being in the middle of a campaign. Reywas92Talk 18:19, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Symbol possible vote.svg The article is in need of an update, as events have proceeded and the Republican senators have returned and are voting again. The original hook's use of "fled" is questionable when considering POV: this was a choice to leave (or fail to show up for work) to prevent quorum from being attained, and they subsequently had to evade the state police after the governor sent the state police after them. (Were any of them apprehended?) Absent an update, the article is not sufficiently complete to qualify for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 23[edit]

Love Not Money

  • ... that Love Not Money is the most overtly-politicised album recorded by the British band Everything but the Girl? Source:"Tracey:"It's our most overtly-politicized set of lyrics—some good, some a bit crass". [14]
    • ALT1:... that themes of British band Everything but the Girl's 1985 album Love Not Money include sexism, social and economic stratification, and The Troubles in Northern Ireland? Source: "They also upped the ante in their songwriting, tackling a range of issues from the Irish troubles to the troubles of movie star Frances Farmer, with lots of criticism of the stratification and sexism of the current social and economic system thrown in." [15]
    • ALT2:... that a reviewer described the song "Sean" from British band Everything but the Girl's 1985 album Love Not Money as "Celtic kitsch" that is "so ham-fisted you'll cringe"? Source: "The murky, cavernous stuff assumes that droning on depressively is the best way to handle weighty topics, and some of the new touches, like the Celtic kitsch of "Sean", with ultra-kitschy tin flute, are so ham-fisted you'll cringe." [[16]]

5x expanded by Baffle gab1978 (talk). Self-nominated at 05:33, 27 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article has been expanded enough, is long enough, and has no copyright violations. The Track listing section and its subsections plus the Personnel section needs to be referenced. SL93 (talk) 02:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • yellow tickY Partly done; I've reffed the track list from Amazon. I cannot find the 1995 reissue on Amazon; I'm looking elsewhere for it. Am I allowed to use discogs.org as a reference for the tracklist? Baffle☿gab 03:15, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, @SL93:, I'll take a look at this and fix the refs in the next few days. This is my first DYK nom;

QPQ  Done: Template:Did you know nominations/Warming stripes. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 06:11, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Comment: thanks for doing the QPQ review, Baffle gab1978. QPQs are always welcome, though per the rules not required until an editor has five DYK credits, so not actually required on your first DYK nomination. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:52, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
No problem; it's as well I start early... :D I'll get this properly reffed tonight. Cheers, 21:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • From searching the Reliable sources noticeboard, I saw Discogs isn't considered reliable since it it user edited. SL93 (talk) 03:28, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks; I guess I'll have to remove or hide that section until it can be referenced. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 01:15, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Being Impossible, Patricia Ortega

Ortega in 2017
Ortega in 2017
  • ... that Venezuelan director Patricia Ortega (pictured) learned that her film Being Impossible had been selected for South by Southwest just as the 2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis started? Source: "Interviewer: What were you doing when you found out you were coming to SXSW? PA: This is a good question! When I received the beautiful news that we had been selected to SXSW, in Venezuela, Juan Guaidó ends up proclaiming himself president of transition in my country." (SXSW)
    • ALT1:... that though Venezuelan director Patricia Ortega's (pictured) first feature film saw wide release in her home country, her more successful second feature, Being Impossible, has yet to be released there? Source: two, Ortega article "Career"

Created by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 08:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol voting keep.svg These two articles are new enough and long enough. The image is appropriately licensed, the hook facts are cited inline and either hook could be used, the articles are neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. Two QPQs have been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I'm having trouble figuring out why either hook is hooky. The first assumes knowledge on the part of the reader by conflating South by Southwest with the presidential crisis, while the other seems rather run of the mill. Yoninah (talk) 01:27, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I think that though the first does require some knowledge for a dramatic reaction, it doesn't need anything but an understanding the SXSW is pretty important in film to appreciate - it establishes that Ortega is from Venezuela, and says that she just found out about a great success as something titled 'crisis' happens in Venezuela. This is simple enough that it's at least mildly interesting for anyone with reading comprehension + has heard of SXSW (fairly common knowledge, I think). You're right, the second one is basic. I probably wasn't feeling very creative. Any suggestions of your own? Of course, the two pages can get separate hooks if you come up with different ones for them. Kingsif (talk) 04:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT2 ... that the much-celebrated lead actress of the film Being Impossible, Lucía Bedoya, was still a drama student when it was being made?
  • ALT3 ... that though Venezuelan director Patricia Ortega had always wanted to make films, she first studied journalism at university?
  • Added alt hooks separately for each of the pages. Kingsif (talk) 12:20, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Kingsif: well, I live overseas and do not watch films, so SXSW means nothing to me. Thanks for the alts. ALT2 is good, but if she's really "much celebrated", why doesn't she have an article? If you want this hook, you might want to write a stub for the actress so it will be a blue link. ALT3 seems kind of weak. I don't see any other colorful biographical details in the article to suggest a different hook. Yoninah (talk) 16:56, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: lol. The actress was much-celebrated for this film, the only one she's done; I'm not sure she meets the BLP standard. But I could write a good stub and propose it as the other bold link if you think there's nothing hook-y enough for Ortega. Of course, there are many hooks that go through that are absolutely bland, like "X made Y", so at least she would be a step up from those! Kingsif (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Kristina Tkach

Created by Lee Vilenski (talk). Self-nominated at 21:43, 23 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, with adequate citations in the prose. Of the two hooks, ALT1 is cited inline and verified. No close paraphrasing was found. However, in the lede, there is an extra "(" character, and the "Achievements" section is completely unsourced. QPQ also still pending. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Should be an easy fix. Wasn't expecting the review so quickly (only made the article yesterday, so no QPQ. I'll review one now.) so thanks! I'll ping when I'm done. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:40, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks, should be good to go now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:25, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but the ALT1 hook, while hooky, doesn't read smoothly. I also added more information from the source to the article, so DYK readers won't just see the same sentence there as in the hook. BTW the source says it was broken while being carried out to the parking lot, not "before leaving the arena". Could we write:
  • ALT1a: ... that a Waterford crystal trophy won by Russian pool player Kristina Tkach at the Women's Pro Players Championship broke in half as it was carried out of the arena? Yoninah (talk) 21:09, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:11, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg No, it did not break in half, it smashed when it was dropped. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Direct quote is "As it was being carried out to a vehicle in preparation for Tkach’s exit from the Expo Center, the box it was in, was dropped, shattering the bowl into the proverbial ‘million pieces.’" I think it's confusing, as it says about it coming in two pieces before, but they just meant it wasn't one item before it broke. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 07:44, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Any update on this, Narutolovehinata5, Cwhiraeth? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:43, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Lee Vilenski, I would imagine that the next move is yours, since ALT1a says "broke in half", yet the quote you gave says "proverbial 'million pieces' ", which as Cwmhiraeth notes, is something completely different. Looking at the source, it seems clear to me: the trophy comes in two pieces: a crystal bowl, and a base the bowl presumably sits on. The box holding the trophy was dropped, and the bowl shattered. You need to propose a new hook for the nomination to proceed; I have struck Yoninah's ALT1a, the only hook that had remained, because it simply isn't accurate. (Please note: the article itself also needs to be adjusted, because it uses the inaccurate "broke in half" language.) BlueMoonset (talk) 14:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
I think you need the passive tense "was broken", something like this Cwmhiraeth (talk) 15:19, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1c ... that a Waterford Crystal trophy, won by Russian pool player Kristina Tkach at the Women's Pro Players Championship, was dropped and broke as it was being carried out of the arena?
  • "Shattered" is better. Yoninah (talk) 15:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
ALT1d sounds okay to me. If there are no more objections then this should be good to go with that hook. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:57, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 24[edit]

Harry Buckwitz

Städtische Bühnen Frankfurt
Städtische Bühnen Frankfurt
  • Reviewed: Guðrún Björnsdóttir
  • Comment: The building was opened during his tenure, instead of the opera house and play house destroyed in the war. - Sorry for a day late.

Created by LouisAlain (talk) and Gerda Arendt (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 16:02, 2 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Hook is interesting. Building image is free-use with Freedom of Panorama permitted in Germany. New article (missed by a day). Hook cited in German AGF'ed and sufficiently referenced. Length is ok. My question is the slight discrepancy for a link between the hook and the article. The hook links to Mutter Courage (Mother Courage), a character. The article, on the other hand, links to Mutter Courage und ihre Kinder (Mother Courage and her Children), a play. So which one is it? OhanaUnitedTalk page 01:43, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the review, and oops, - I fixed the link, but left the title short, for less German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Can you confirm this sentence is sourced? "His appointment there led to a fierce controversy with the journalist Hans Habe, who accused him of having once been a henchman of Adolf Hitler, in an article for the newspaper Welt am Sonntag" OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:57, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
It is in the ref after the following sentence, Die Zeit. The section was translated before I got to the article, probable because it was better sourced than others. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:29, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

It is still lacking some references:

  1. "He also produced works by contemporary authors such as Friedrich Dürrenmatt, Max Frisch, Rolf Hochhuth, Eugène Ionesco, Arthur Miller, Jean-Paul Sartre and Tennessee Williams, some of them performed in Germany for the first time"
  2. In 1962, Buckwitz became vice president of the German Academy of the Performing Arts

Also, citing a reference in "Further reading" section is quite peculiar (also "WorldCat" is misspelled). I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve there. Since you used many German references, it's recommended that a German editor to also review the sources and affirm what was written matches with the references. OhanaUnitedTalk page 00:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

I added a ref to the one already there (just a sentence later) for the authors and German premieres. Same ref for his presidency. I dropped the sentence about the move of that Academy, - have no time to dig up a ref for that minor detail. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 27[edit]

Samragyee RL Shah

5x expanded by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk). Self-nominated at 12:01, 28 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The article was more than 5x expanded and has no copyright violations. Everything is reliable cited including the hook. The hook is interesting. A QPQ is still needed. SL93 (talk) 18:25, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
The article also probably needs a copyedit: I can see some typo errors and awkwardly-constructed phrases in the article, such as In 2019, Shah is currently working on Maruni, where will be portraying a role of trans woman. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:55, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
I've done some cleanup; there are a couple of awkward phrasings that are quoted as given. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 20:33, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
  • SL93, have your issues been addressed now, and have Narutolovehinata5's as well? It's been nearly three weeks since the review began; it would be nice to know where things stand. Thanks for taking another look. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
The first sentence of the "Early life and personal life" section could be reworded. "Shah was born on... She was born to..."; those sentences could probably be combined. There's also a missing space before "The film became a huge box office success". The quote Shah was ranked tenth in the list "Top 10 Women and Men of the Year" sounds weird to me, but I'm not very familiar with Indian English grammar so I'm not sure if that's how such sentences are worded in Nepal. The phrase "but Gurung left the project after Shah overtook her" needs to be clarified: overtook in terms of what? Finally, the mention of the film Rato Teeka Nidharma: has that film been released yet? It's in the 2018 section but that part is still in the future tense. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5,  Done i've fixed the error's raised above.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 11:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't think I've heard the wording "overtook her lead role in a film" before. Perhaps that part could be reworded? The article looks better now, but I think it would still be a good idea to request a copyedit of the article over at WP:GOCE. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I've requested for a copyedit over at WP:GOCE/R; the nomination should be good to go once that has been accomplished. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 29[edit]

Kerstin von Lingen

  • ... that Kerstin von Lingen wrote her PhD thesis on the war crimes trial of Field Marshal Albert Kesselring? Source: "1999-2001: wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin im SFB 437 "Kriegserfahrungen" in Tübingen, Thema: "Konstruktion von Kriegserfahrung. Der Prozess gegen Feldmarschall Albert Kesselring vor einem britischen Militärgericht". 2002-2003: Abschluß der Promotion, Rigorosum 29.7.2003" [19]

Created by Hawkeye7 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:34, 29 June 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg In addition to the source not being independent, the result of using the CV so thoroughly is that the prose reads very much like a list. An article should go beyond a list of positions or publications. For example, what influenced her work? How has she revised or expanded on existing scholarship? Additional sources will help with this. Kim Post (talk) 18:21, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Good idea. Let me know when you have them, and I will incorporate them into the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:47, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Book reviews might be the most straightforward independent sources here.[20][21][22][23] Or, perhaps her own commentary on her work in front matter.[24] Kim Post (talk) 23:06, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on June 30[edit]

Nicholas Emery

Created by Alphalfalfa (talk). Self-nominated at 17:41, 30 June 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Unfortunately, this article is neither new nor expanded 5x. On June 12, its size was 1,835 bytes and its current size is 6,045 bytes. Almost the entire byte size of the article is prose. Therefore, without further expansion, this article is ineligible. Ergo Sum 17:30, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg Considering it seems relatively close to hitting 5x (it only needs an additional amount of bytes), I'd say we could probably give the nomination another chance. Also note that as far as I'm aware, the 5x requirement actually refers to prose content, not byte content. Prior to the nom's first edit, the article was at around 500 characters; it's at around the 2100 mark. Thus, the article only needs about 400 characters more to be eligible. With that said, the nom hasn't been active since the day after the nomination, so if this is to proceed, the remaining expansion needs to be done as soon as possible. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:41, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg Marking again for closure. The nominator has not edited since the day of the nomination and has been unable to return despite a talk page message. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:14, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg As far as I can tell, this is a merged version of two articles. The first, by BD2412, was created in Draft space on August 27, 2015, and stayed there for nearly four years, with various edits being made in that period. The second, by Alphalfalfa, was created in mainspace on June 30, 2019. Later on June 30, BD2412 brought the new Alphalfalfa article briefly into Draft space, merged the contents of the two articles (and their histories), and moved the combined article back into mainspace.
If I have this history correct (hoping BD2412 can give a definitive answer), then the article's first appearance in mainspace was on June 30, the day this was nominated, and it would then count as a new nomination. Under the circumstances, the nomination should remain open for the present, and if I'm correct, at 2194 prose characters, it is more than long enough to qualify as a new-to-mainspace article. Whether Alphalfalfa is currently editing only becomes relevant if issues are found with the article or hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:36, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • That is correct, the article was originally in draftspace, and the draftspace content and history were merged up to the mainspace article once that was created. Ideally, the author of the mainspace article should have checked for a draft first, and made their edits to the draft, but the result is the same. Either way, the article did not exist in mainspace at all until June 30. bd2412 T 02:41, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg BD2412, thank you. New full review needed of nomination, since it is both new enough when nominated and long enough to qualify for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Not exactly a major issue, but there's no source in the article for the date of death. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • There is now; one of the sources already there had the information. Rather than nickel and dime this, can we have a new full review, please? Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I will do a full review.

Policy compliance:

Hook eligiblity:

  • Cited: Red XN - ref quoting one million acres is incomplete- page is missing "AGF" (assume good faith) may be entered if hook it cited to an offline source--->
  • Interesting: Green tickY

QPQ: ????
Overall: Symbol question.svg minor problems, needs a small amt of work. I do like this article to become a DYK. Wuerzele (talk) 16:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

sorry I cant get the table to show up properly- I labored on this for 30 min now... will notify editor.Wuerzele (talk) 16:34, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Wuerzele, use of the DYK checklist is entirely optional. You can just write out your comments on the various criteria manually. That said, when the instructions say put "y", what they means is to use the letter or symbol that's in the quotes, but without the quotes themselves. I've taken the liberty of removing the quotes on the right side of the equal signs in the template, and that seems to have made a major difference for the better. The big question marks are items that you still need to check and fill in (plagiarismfree and qpq). BlueMoonset (talk) 05:18, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 1[edit]

Kim Kardashian, Superstar

Created by Vistadan (talk). Nominated by CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk) at 14:06, 1 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol possible vote.svg The archived hiphoppress.com source seems historically valuable (within the context of Kim Kardashian's life story), but I doubt we can take its claims at face value. The source is a press release by Vivid Entertainment published on hiphoppress.com, with the site acting as a newswire. Vivid, of course, acquired and distributed the tape, making them a primary (and likely unreliable) source. There is also conflicting information: per the article, Ian Halperin has alleged that Kim and her mother leaked the tape to Vivid, which sounds like it conflicts with Vivid's narrative of purchasing it from a third party.
So we have two apparently conflicting versions of events: either a third party sold the tape to Vivid for a million dollars, or the Kardashians leaked it to Vivid themselves. Both versions of events are disputed. I don't know what the basis for Halperin's claims are, but I know Vivid is not a disinterested secondary source—they're an involved party with a likely conflict of interest. I think it would be better to develop an alternate hook, and the article itself could be bulked up with more info. For instance, I imagine there are sources out there providing details about the tape's commercial success? —BLZ · talk 00:12, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
A drive-by comment, but I strongly suggest that the hook be reworded due to BLP concerns, and also because Wikipedia is not a tabloid. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:37, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
What do you propose the hook be changed to? I've added an alt that changes "sex tape" to "pornographic film" if that was the BLP concern? Vistadan 14:05, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
I suppose that might be a better option, but it might still be too "tabloidy" for my tastes. Pinging reviewer Brandt Luke Zorn for their thoughts. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:05, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
I think using the term "sex tape" is probably OK, honestly. It may sound colloquial or even inappropriate, but it does accurately describe the contents or "genre" of the tape, since "celebrity sex tape" is its own distinct category of porn. "Pornographic film", on the other hand, may sound more formal but is starched of all meaning and specificity. Plus it may even misleadingly suggest that the tape was made in a "professional" production context, which could be a BLP concern in the opposite direction: a "pornographic film" is filmed with the intention that it will be distributed, and we don't want to suggest that a video filmed in a private setting was professionally "produced" (it wasn't) or that it was planned to be distributed at the time of filming (it doesn't seem that way, but that's apparently in dispute at the least).
My issue is more about the questionable grounding of the "fact" in the hook. It's not wrong to say, in the article, that Vivid claimed to have paid $1 million for the tape. It's true that they made that claim, and the cited press release is adequate . But there is a dispute about what really happened (according to the Halperin book, anyway), and the hook relies on a primary source from an involved party with a conflict-of-interest as to how the events are represented, i.e., the press release is not an objective secondhand account of "what really happened". Based on the various sources in the article at the moment and the conflicting accounts, I would not be comfortable using any fact about what happened leading up to the tape's distribution.
On the other hand, I'm not sure which alternate "fact" from the article I would choose for a hook at present. What I do suspect is that the article subject matter is big enough that it could be expanded. It is, after all, one of the most notorious videos of the last 20 years, and one that eventually propelled Kim to an almost unprecedented level of superstardom in the history of celebrity culture. It's been discussed and written about endlessly, which means there must be a sturdier fact out that could be used. For example, just off the top of my head as a Kanye fan, I recall that his line "My girl a superstar all from a home movie" from "Clique" is an allusion to the tape (see e.g. [27]). I'm sure Kanye's mentioned it elsewhere, whether in his lyrics or in interviews or both. There's also Ray J's "I Hit It First". Neither of those songs are mentioned in this article, which means there's more to talk about and more that could be used as a hook out there. —BLZ · talk 20:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

John Deane (sailor)

  • ... that John Deane and his crew of the Nottingham Galley cannibalised in desperation the ship's deceased carpenter when the ship wrecked on Boon Island in 1710?
    • ALT1:... that the British sailor and diplomat John Deane, was accused of accepting a considerable bribe in exchange for the surrender of the two Swedish vessels whilst captaining a Russian Navy frigate, with his initial sentence reduced by Peter the Great and further exonerated by Fyodor Apraksin?

Created by D.j.atherton (talk). Self-nominated at 11:28, 4 July 2019 (UTC).

Symbol question.svg The article meets DYK requirements, meets sourcing requirements, the hook fact is interesting and is mentioned inline and verified. Nominator has no prior DYK credits so no QPQ is required. Earwigs detects some close paraphrasing with this source, which will need to be addressed before this can be approved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:38, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing Narutolovehinata5 - can you possibly confirm whether the close paraphrasing is an issue with the hook fact or the article? I am aware there was an issue with the article that has since been resolved with the help of another user. Thanks for your help! D.J.A (talk) 10:47, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
@D.j.atherton: It was with the article. There were some sentences that appear to have been missed from the rewrite. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:48, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: thanks for the clarification! It has hopefully been cleaned up as necessary - earwig report is now at 5%. Hopefully that's alright? Thanks, D.J.A (talk) 11:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg Thanks, I think this should be good to go now. Earwigs still has a score of 23% for another source, but the common statements are so short that I think WP:LIMITED applies. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:09, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Symbol question.svg I note that there are some unsourced paragraphs, some closing sentences to paragraphs that are uncited, and that ALT1 is far too long for a hook? Spokoyni (talk) 20:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Oof, thanks for pointing that out Spokoyni, somehow missed those unsourced paragraphs. But I saw in a recent DYK nomination that the rule only requires at least one reference per paragraph and these can be anywhere in the paragraph (even at the start), though I'd guess this is aside from BLPs or other controversial topics such as politics and medicine. @D.j.atherton: Can you please try lookig for references for the paragraphs without citations? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 20:59, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
No problem, I've missed some obvious things in reviews and wondered how I managed to do so. Easily done. Wikipedia:Inline citation (particularly Wikipedia:CITEDENSE) and Wikipedia:When to cite are pretty generally worded guidelines, probably the most relevant bit is "Everything in [a] paragraph [that] deals with the same, single subject from the same source ... can ... be supported by a single inline citation. The inline citation could be placed at any sensible location, but the end of the paragraph is the most common choice." The only concern with not putting it at the end of a paragraph is I think that someone might come along and wonder if everything that follows after the cite in a paragraph is from a different source, or has no source at all. But it looks like there's no hard rule in wiki generally, and that the DYK rules only state that the hook fact must be cited in the sentence it appears in, and the "rule of thumb is one inline citation per paragraph". Spokoyni (talk) 21:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi both, Spokoyni and Narutolovehinata5, I have made clearer the sourcing so there shouldn't be any paragraphs left un-sourced. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help this! Thanks both of you! D.J.A (talk) 10:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Hi D.J.A, good work! At the moment the first paragraph of "Early life" and the second paragraph of "Personal life and retirement" still don't seem to have any cites. There's also a few paragraphs that have no cites at the end. As discussed above, that isn't necessarily a problem, though some users might tag these as uncited. It's up to you if you want to leave them as they are. Spokoyni (talk) 10:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Spokoyni, I'd overlooked those two paragraphs obviously! I see what you mean about the few paragraphs without a citation at the end but I think, unless anyone does flag it as an issue, the current amount are pretty concise? — Preceding unsigned comment added by D.j.atherton (talkcontribs) 10:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
General wikipedia guidelines are pretty relaxed (see above), so if you'd prefer to keep it as it is, that I don't think that should stand in the way of promotion. Of course Narutolovehinata5 is the reviewer here, I'm just chiming in with some thoughts. I'd only say you might have to be prepared to deal with that at some point, possibly while it is on the main page, as articles tend to get a lot of external scrutiny. Spokoyni (talk) 10:39, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
The rules do require at least one reference per paragraph for DYK articles, so this can't be promoted until that's addressed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:26, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 3[edit]

Robert Michael Forde

Trypanosoma parasites in blood
Trypanosoma parasites in blood

Created by Philafrenzy (talk) and Whispyhistory (talk). Nominated by Philafrenzy (talk) at 11:25, 8 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg The article needs to cite the specific page(s) of the Baker 1995 article (I assume p. 5 for the sentence corresponding to the hook). The hook probably also needs a small rewrite, because it's currently ambiguous and might imply that Forde discovered that they were the causes of sleeping sickness, which seems to be incorrect according to the sources. I would suggest something like, "... that Robert Michael Forde made the first observation of Trypanosoma parasites (pictured), the causes of sleeping sickness, in human beings?" Otherwise this seems good: Created (and expanded) within 7 days of nomination and article is long enough and adequately sourced. I corrected some small issues with style. The image is PD and good quality. No issues on Earwig. —Nizolan (talk) 00:18, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
@Nizolan: Alt1 added as suggested. Ref has also been done. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Ich steh vor dir mit leeren Händen, Herr

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 16:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg - new enough, long enough, qpq done, hook looks good. inline citations checks out. overall good article. good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 23:37, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but it doesn't seem hooky; it's more in-universe, just telling me the content of the song. Can you suggest another hook? Yoninah (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
I would like to tell the content because it's very unusual content. Awareness of one's own empty hands has little glamour. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
I agree with Yoninah. I also don't think that a broad audience would know that such a thing is unusual, especially because the hook doesn't mention it. To move this along, does anyone have an alternative hook? @Yoninah: @Gerda Arendt: SL93 (talk) 17:25, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I wouldn't fight it, but believe that the precise imagery of empty hands and God being one's breath are unusual without saying that they unusual, while "insecurity and questions" are more general, so not as colourful. Our often cited "general reader" may also misunderstand "bar" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
It's linked. Yoninah (talk) 21:26, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I argued that Irmgard Seefried and Peter Schreier were linked, remember? - DDd it help? - It's all a minor point, the key being that "empty hands" is a more precise image than a pale "insecure". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't think this WordPress blog is reliable. SL93 (talk) 06:32, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I moved it to external links. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:45, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Lebanon women's national football team

Improved to Good Article status by Nehme1499 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol confirmed.svg Article was promoted to GA status within the last seven days, is over the required prose size and has no copyvio concerns. The first ref verifies the use of the nickname, the second is in Arabic so AGF for that one but it's not a stretch to see where it comes from. QPQ checker indicates this is the user's first DYK so no review is required. Good to go. Kosack (talk) 10:16, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but I don't see the hook fact in either of the inline sources (footnotes 2 and 3). Also, there are no sources for the information in the charts under "Competitive record". Yoninah (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Footnote 2 reads "...with the Lady Cedars holding on to equal their best ever finish at the tournament". Footnote 3 reads "صبايا الأرز تهز شباك هونغ كونغ بسداسية نظيفة" (translation: The Lady Cedars shake the Hong Hong net six times). The implication of the nickname deriving from the country's national symbol is obvious. All national team GAs don't have the "Competitive record" section sourced: see Croatia national football team or Central African Republic women's national football team, for example. Nehme1499 (talk) 22:42, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Nehme1499: But neither of those sources specifically says that they're called the Lady Cedars because of the Lebanese Cedar. Without a source, it's OR. OK on the competitive record. Yoninah (talk) 22:45, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: I see, because it’s impossible to find a source stating the reason for such a nickname. I might be able to find something for the male’s NT (The Cedars), would that work? Nehme1499 (talk) 22:54, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Nehme1499: No, this article is about the women. I suggest you comment out the sentence in the article for now and look for another fact for the DYK hook. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:04, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


  • Thank you, ALT3 is a nice hook. But while the inline cite confirms that it was their first qualification round, it doesn't mention the 7 years part. At the beginning of this section, you say the team was formed in 2005, which would be 9 years. Yoninah (talk) 22:00, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Yoninah: Sorry you are right, I miscounted: it is eight years (inception in 2005, qualification matches in 2013 for the 2014 tournament). As for the source, we could add the one that states that they were formed in 2005, I don't think that simple maths would be considered OR. Nehme1499 (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 4[edit]

Jewish Democratic Committee

  • ... that the Jewish Democratic Committee and the Romanian Communist Party colluded to send indoctrinated Romanian Jews into Israel, in the hope that they would influence Israeli policies? Source: Oțoiu, pp. 202–203; Lazăr, p. 197 also mentions a transport of communist-indoctrinated Romanian Jews
    • ALT1:... that anti-Zionism as espoused by the Jewish Democratic Committee was "unacceptable for a majority of Jews in Romania", leading some of its own members to apply for emigration to Israel? Source: Quote in Bottoni, p. 268; one example of Committee leaders (in Suceava County) applying for emigration is in Lazăr, pp. 207–208
    • ALT2:... that the Jewish Democratic Committee went from embracing a Labor Zionist wing in 1945 to organizing a pro-communist clampdown on Labor Zionism in 1949? Source: For the full list of Labor Zionist groups admitted into the Committee in 1945, see Crăciun, p. 176; for the sharing of an electoral ticket with Labor Zionists, see Nastasă, p. 181; for the clampdown, see Kuller, pp. 144–145

5x expanded by Dahn (talk). Self-nominated at 20:50, 7 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg 5x expanded, long enough, ALT0 doesn't seem particularly neutral but ALTs 1 and 2 are within policy. Hooks are formatted correctly, but I can't seem to find where in the article these statements appear? QPQ done, no image. @Dahn: all it needs is for the hook statements to be in the prose. Wug·a·po·des​ 02:35, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi and thanks. I'm not sure what you mean about ALT0: there are numerous sources attesting that fact (as the article notes, this plan was the topic of popular jokes: "At this stage, the PCR was viewing immigration as a potential asset, since an indoctrinated Romanian Jewish colony could bring Palestine, and subsequently Israel, into the Eastern bloc, ensuring that government was formed by the Hebrew Communists.[85] Its design was picked up on by the general public, and universally ridiculed: "A widely circulated anecdote had the emigrating Jews throwing their party cards overboard once the ship left [its] Romanian port".[9]"), and the hook is a statement of facts. I'm also unsure about what neutrality we're supposed to achieve in describing the absurd actions of a totalitarian state -- I mean sure, we don't use epithets or drivel against it, but we're surely not supposed to go out of our way to ignore the scope of its action (and neither is there a requirement that we should do so). I would really urge you to reconsider, because I frankly feel it is the most interesting of the hooks.
    ALT1 actually has the statement verbatim in the article: if you search within the text, without the quote marks, you'll find this exact sequence (it's part of a larger quote: "According to historian Stefano Bottoni, it marked "the first visible sign of a failed compromise, whose bases — namely, that party members were to drop their 'strong' Jewish identity, while the petty and middle bourgeoisie were to be economically ruined — had been proven as unacceptable for a majority of Jews in Romania.""); there are now several references to Committee members applying for emigration -- "The regime was much embarrassed when, in May 1950, the CDE's top echelons in Suceava County submitted requests for emigration, and again in September, when Zelțer-Sărățeanu was booed by Unirea Sfântă congregants for speaking out against emigration.[157] Northern Transylvanian cities also experienced the mass emigration of CDE members, including all the party hierarchy in Năsăud.[60]"
    ALT2 refers to two facts, one of which is discussed and sourced throughout the article, and the other discussed in particular in the whole section "Labour Zionist schism"; for both clauses together, see for instance: "A return to officially sanctioned anti-Zionist violence was made in November 1948, when Police raided the Jewish National Fund, detaining its leader Leon Itzcar on charges of contraband; this campaign was fully endorsed by Unirea, who referred to Zionists as "blackmarketeers" and "disrupters of the socialist economy".[113] During December, CDE squads stormed into the Bucharest offices of the ten remaining Zionist organisations,[114][115] including Mishmar, Ihud, Bnei Akiva, and HaOved HaTzioni. The latter two in particular mounted resistance,[116] with publicised incidents which prompted communist authorities order a truce. At least seen officer had been returned to Zionist ownership by 6 December.[115] In the aftermath, PCR internal documents criticised the CDE for being "hamfisted".[117]" Dahn (talk) 04:55, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 8[edit]

2019 CONCACAF Gold Cup Final

  • Reviewed: TBD
  • Comment: I plan on writing a separate article on the 2007 final soon, which would be worked in using ALT1.

5x expanded by SounderBruce (talk). Self-nominated at 07:13, 11 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Few issues with this one SounderBruce, I see no copyvio issues, and the article meets the requirements in terms of age and length. Needs QPQ. I do have a few issues with the hooks. The main hook seems pretty arbitrary - why is the sixth time important?
Alt1 mentions it's the same teams, probably should say it's the same national teams, as it's not the same XI.
alt2 I prefer it to say they competed in both finals on the same day. Their results are not really important for the hook. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:29, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • I have inserted a question mark above to make it clear that a review has been done. Flibirigit (talk) 00:49, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Hassan Maatouk

Maatouk training with Lebanon in 2018
Maatouk training with Lebanon in 2018

Improved to Good Article status by Nehme1499 (talk). Self-nominated at 21:21, 8 July 2019 (UTC).

  • I am not here to review but just want to suggest: ALT2B:... that, at a cost of earned $900,000 for three years with Al Ansar FC, Hassan Maatouk (pictured) is the most expensive transferred player in Lebanese history? Source: Kooora
    Cheers! –MJLTalk 23:54, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
@MJL: The problem is that "most expensive transferred player" would make it sound as if the club had payed $900,000 over three years to his previous club. The "record" is just related to the player's wage. Nehme1499 (talk) 00:46, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
@Nehme1499: Good point. I'll withdraw that hook suggestion. Face-smile.svgMJLTalk 00:54, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg I came here to review this, but before doing so, I'm just wondering: @Nehme1499: Is there no known information about Maatouk's personal life? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:16, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: I’m not sure what aspects of his personal life could be considered notable or interesting. He has a wife and a child, but I know that from social media. Not sure what you would be looking for here. Nehme1499 (talk) 00:21, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Many biographies have a "Personal life" section which mentions basic information about their non-professional lives, such as family members or other aspects. The article didn't seem to have one when I checked, which is why I asked. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Ah ok I see, I thought you had suggested using a fact from his personal life as an alternative hook for the nomination. I will add a “Personal life” section in case I were able to find something. Nehme1499 (talk) 00:33, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 9[edit]

Städtische Bühnen Frankfurt

Opern- und Schauspielhaus Frankfurt in 2014
Opern- und Schauspielhaus Frankfurt in 2014

Converted from a redirect by Gerda Arendt (talk) and Grimes2 (talk). Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk) at 08:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Gerda Arendt: New and long enough, QPQ done. Earwig detects no copyvios, unsuprisingly since most of the sources are in German. Second to last paragraph lacks a cite. The hook is a bit strightforward; a better hook might be based on the current structure incorporating elements of the old structure that was bombed out in WWII. Antony–22 (talkcontribs) 01:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the review! I added the official website as a ref.
ALT1: ... that the Städtische Bühnen Frankfurt manage stages for opera and drama in Frankfurt under one roof (pictured), built including the ruins of the bombed play house?
ALT2: ... that the Städtische Bühnen Frankfurt manage stages for opera and drama in Frankfurt under one roof (pictured), after the former separate theatres were bombed in Wold War II?
Better wording welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 11[edit]

Royal christening gown

Edward VIII wearing the gown at his christening.
Edward VIII wearing the gown at his christening.
  • ... that the original royal christening gown, created in 1841, was worn by sixty-two royal babies over 163 years? Source: "The dress was worn by 62 royal babies over the course of its 163 years of royal service. Five monarchs have been baptized in the gown, beginning with Victoria and Albert's first son, the future Edward VII." ([28])
    • ALT1: ... that the royal christening gown, created in 1841, was inspired by the wedding dress of Queen Victoria? Source: "The gown had been inspired by Queen Victoria's own wedding dress, and was made from white silk with a handmade lace overlay." ([29])
    • ALT2: ... that five British monarchs were christened in the same royal christening gown from 1841? Source: "Five monarchs have been baptized in the gown, beginning with Victoria and Albert's first son, the future Edward VII. George V, Edward VIII, George VI and the Queen all wore the white lace dress, as did Prince Charles, Prince William, and Prince Harry." ([30])

Created by Mesmeilleurs (talk). Self-nominated at 23:08, 11 July 2019 (UTC). Previously nominated by DragonflySixtyseven (talk) at 16:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC).


  • Note that I have made a few changes to the article, but none that I see as sufficiently major to render me an unobjective reviewer.
  • Article is long enough and was nominated (twice!) the day it was created, so meets eligibility criteria 1 and 2
  • Suitable references are included to support all the proposed hooks and these facts are cited and referenced in the article. Interesting to a broad audience is subjective, but a gown in use for 163 is unusual and there are plenty of people fascinated by everything Royal, so it is my opinion that eligibility criterion 3 is satisfied
  • Article is not a stub, covers the topic adequately, but I am concerned that the lede is about only the British gown (and the title implies that is the only one) but the article goes on to discuss Swedish and Danish examples. Perhaps a broader lede then a section on the British gown and others on the Danish and Swedish gowns. Mesmeilleurs, what do you think?
  • Earwig rates 5.7% and the commonalities highlighted are brief phrases that are not going to support any copyright / plagiarism claim.
  • So, my only policy concern (eligibility criterion 4) is about the lede / targeting issue - is this about only the British gown, so change the title, or is it broader, so modify the lede / structure?
  • On eligibility criterion 5, I am unsure. The creator, Mesmeilleurs, has only one DYK credit and so is exempt from the QPQ requirement. However, the nominator in the other nomination, DragonflySixtyseven, does have more than five DYK credits. My instinct is that either this proceeds with Mesmeilleurs receiving the sole credit, in which case no QPQ is required, or if DragonflySixtyseven is to receive a nominator credit, a QPQ is needed. BlueMoonset, what do you think?
  • I need to go out now, will come back to this in a few hours and do the hook review, etc... but in the meantime, this is Symbol possible vote.svg going to need some (fairly minor) work. Mesmeilleurs, I am sure this will make it to the front page so don't be discouraged. I almost went with Symbol question.svg but technically the structure / title issue and the (unusual) QPQ situation means that I see it as more than just "an issue" to address. EdChem (talk) 23:59, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • EdChem, my feeling is that the article creator should have a reasonable chance to nominate their own article, and I rather expect that Mandarax felt the same way: Mesmeilleurs created the article at 15:32, and DragonflySixtyseven nominated it 75 minutes later at 16:47. The enthusiasm is nice, but there are seven days to nominate a new article at DYK. I think I'd leave it to Mesmeilleurs as to whether the nomination credit should be shared with DragonflySixtyseven, and that if so (and DragonflySixtyseven wishes credit) DS would indeed need to provide a QPQ. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm happy for DragonflySixtyseven to share nom credit if they want. I'm also happy to make any changes, etc. so all the criteria are satisfied. Just let me know what I need to do! Thanks, MesmeilleursSay Hey! 11:39, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I just re-arranged the article a little so it wasn't biased towards the British gown, hopefully this is better? I was a little unsure as for what to put in a general intro so it's a bit basic, but I think it's more along the lines of the discussed "broader lede". Also, maybe we could change the hooks to specify that it's the UK gown (e.g. "… that the British royal christening gown was […]")? Also, if DragonflySixtyseven doesn't indicate they want to share nom credit shortly, I'm happy to just proceed with myself as sole nomination credit. Thanks, MesmeilleursSay Hey! 19:39, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Did a QPQ on "beryllium-8" (if that one's insufficient, I've got others). DS (talk) 15:49, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Mesmeilleurs, I like the rearrangement, but I do have an issue with the lede stating that there are three families presently using them and then listing four. Also, changing it to four and adding the Dutch to the lede would mean a reference stating that there are, in fact, only four in use would be needed. I'd make the into more general and present the ones we have as examples without asserting how many there are. I agree on modifying the ALTs to include mention of "British". EdChem (talk) 12:07, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I was unaware at the time that Piratesswoop had added a section on the Dutch gown, and they unfortunately forgot to update the intro. I noticed and I've generalised it, hopefully it's better now. MesmeilleursSay Hey! 17:32, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Excellent, thanks, Mesmeilleurs. I've made a couple of tweaks, I hope you don't mind. :) EdChem (talk) 11:08, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Updated ALTs

I have struck all the original ALTs as some need modification due to the change in the article focus, and as none incorporate reference to the proposed picture. I am listing modified versions that seem to me to fit with the intent of the originals:
Christening of the future Edward VIII
Christening of the future Edward VIII
Mesmeilleurs and DragonflySixtyseven, I have listed and modified ALTs above given the changed focus of the article. These are suggestions so any tweaks / modifications / objections, etc, please identify or just go ahead and change. I'm not sure about the italicising around pictured, either. I don't think we can identify the picture as Edward VIII as he was, at the time of his christening, His Highness Prince Edward of York. I added "to date" to ALT2a as both Charles, Prince of Wales, and Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, were christened in the 1841 gown and so five monarchs is true now but a total of seven seems likely. Comments / Thoughts? EdChem (talk) 12:36, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm not 100% confident in the PD nature of that photo, I should point out. I know it was published in Edward VIII's coronation book in 1936, and it's plausible that it was published in the 1890s, but I'd really like some proof. (And Pocock died in 1952, so it's not PD-70 yet.) DS (talk) 12:48, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
I've removed that image as the PD status is unclear and have uploaded another, Edward and George Christening.jpg. I got this from the National Portrait Gallery website which allows some images to be used non-commercially on a Creative Commons license, and this one was covered, so I licensed it and uploaded it. It's Edward VIII holding his brother Prince George, Duke of Kent wearing the gown. Of course, we could also submit the nomination without a photo too, if it's too much of a hassle. MesmeilleursSay Hey! 17:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

─────────────────────────By identifying the photographer as Frederick Ralph, and specifying that he died in 1919, you have revealed that the photo is public domain in almost all nations (including the USA). This supersedes the "CC-non-commercial" license (Mr. Ralph certainly never agreed to have his work licensed as "Creative Commons", since he died over 80 years before it was invented), and I will now transfer it to Commons. DS (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Prince George held by his brother, the future-King Edward VIII
Prince George held by his brother, the future-King Edward VIII
DragonflySixtyseven, thanks for pointing out the licensing / PD issue. I've re-stated the ALTs with the new image – comments / changes welcome, as before, from both of you. EdChem (talk) 11:08, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Summary: As far as I can see, this nomination meets all the criteria for a main page appearance. The article was new enough, long enough, and policy compliant. The hooks are neutral and cited, and I think will be interesting to enough people, especially those with fascination for babies or royalty. D67 has satisfied the QPQ requirement. The image is PD. My only uncertainty is the hook: which to use, what bits to italicise, can it be shortened and made hookier, and what caption to use. I am going to request input at WT:DYK, but am ready to tick with a hook chosen. EdChem (talk) 12:46, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for all of your help on the nomination and the article, EdChem; I really appreciate it. (And everyone else too!) I’m personally inclined towards ALT0a, or maybe a combination of ALT0a and ALT3a? I think it sounds more impressive and eye-catching to say ‘163-year history’ rather than ‘between 1841 and 2004’, but I think the general wording of ALT3a is better than ALT0a. Maybe something like: “… that one royal christening gown was worn by 62 babies (including Prince George, Duke of Kent, pictured in 1903) over its 163-year history?” MesmeilleursSay Hey! 00:32, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
Or even omitting George’s name from the hook and having something like “… that one royal christening gown (pictured in 1903) was worn by 62 babies over its 163-year history?”, which might be better if length was a concern. George is mentioned in the caption anyway. MesmeilleursSay Hey! 00:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Reviewer needed to decide which hooks can be approved; it's been over three weeks without the previous reviewer, EdChem, ultimately choosing or approve any of the hooks. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:28, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 17[edit]

Assassination of Ali Sayyad Shirazi

Ali Sayyad Shirazi
Ali Sayyad Shirazi

Created by Mhhossein (talk). Self-nominated at 11:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svgThe article is new enough, long enough. I moved the NYT times citation to the bottom of the lead to make sure that your hook fact is directly followed by an inline citation. Does not appear to have copyright violations and the article approaches the subject in a neutral manner. I think your hook is okay. There are no problems with it; however, to make the hook more interesting and to get the article more views, you could consider adding that he was assassinated by someone dressed as a street cleaner. It makes the hook more interesting because it is unusual and unexpected. I think this would make the hook much more interesting. Let me know if you agree or disagree. Thanks. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Skyes(BYU): Thanks for the review and for the suggestion. It's was a brilliant idea which I tried to implement in ALT1 and ALT2. Please see if it's suitable and hooky:
ALT1: ... that Ali Sayyad Shirazi (pictured), the 3rd deputy chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces, was assassinated in 1999 by a Mojahedin-e Khalq agent disguised as a street cleaner? Chicagotribune, New York Times
I also suggest adding Sayyad Shirazi's picture to the nomination. See if it's suitable for inclusion. --Mhhossein talk 11:37, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I approve ALT1, great improvement! Not sure about the image though. The url source for the image does not direct to a website so I am unable to determine whether the licensing of the image is valid. Unless you are willing to spend the time to track down the image source to determine whether it contains the appropriate copyright license, I recommend going without the image and I can just approve your ALT1 hook as is. Skyes(BYU) (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

LGBT cinema in Latin America

5x expanded by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 13:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC).

  1. ^ "10 great LGBTQ+ films from Latin America". BFI. Retrieved 17 July 2019.
  2. ^ B. Ruby Rich (2013). New Queer Cinema: The Director's Cut. Duke University Press. ISBN 9780822354284.
  • Symbol question.svg Article meets expansion and length requirements, a QPQ has been done, no close paraphrasing was found, and the article is adequately sourced (apart from the List of films section, though I am willing to ignore this provided that the summaries given are sourced in the respective films articles). Both hooks are interesting and cited inline and either could be promoted; however in the case of the first hook, the link appears to only specifically mention the machismo part, but the article instead uses "religious" instead of "Catholic" (which does not appear anywhere in the article). I am assuming good faith for the offline source for hook two. Also, the sentence "Also based on Italian sex comedy, this is the Pornochanchada genre."; since it's the last sentence of its paragraph, would it be possible to find a source or at least a footnote for this statement? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:50, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Zeferino Peña Cuéllar

  • ... that former police chief Zeferino Peña Cuéllar reportedly fled Mexico following an attempt on his life? Source: [Spanish] "Don Zefe habria abandonado el pais tras [el atentado contra su vida] en Nuevo Leon ... Todo hace suponer que el senor Peña esta fuera del pais; sin embargo, la busqueda sigue; el trabajo intenso de la Unidad Contra la Delincuencia Organizada sigue / [English]: "Don Zefe left the country after [the attempt on his life] that occurred in Nuevo Leon ... Everything suggests that Mr. Peña is out of the country; however, the search continues; the intense work of the Unit Against Organized Crime continues" (El Norte)
    • ALT1:... that gunmen tried to kill Zeferino Peña Cuéllar for suspecting that he assisted in a drug lord's arrest? Source: [Spanish] "Gilberto Garcia Mena, El June, detenido en abril en Guardados de Abajo, Tamaulipas, descubrio que Don Zefe fue quien lo delato y no Edelio Lopez Falcon, El Yeyo, a quien en mayo otro comando trato de sorprender en el Palenque de la Expo ... El Subsecretario de Seguridad Publica, Raul Maldonado, dijo al mediodia en rueda de prensa que todo apunta a que se trata de un ajuste de cuentas, seguramente relacionado con el trafico de drogas." / [English]: Gilberto Garcia Mena, El June, arrested in April in Guardados de Abajo, Tamaulipas, discovered that Don Zefe was the one who turned him in and not Edelio Lopez Falcon, El Yeyo, whom in May another armed commando tried to kill him in the Palenque of the Expo ... The Undersecretary of Public Security, Raul Maldonado, said at noon at a press conference that everything points to settling of scores, probably related to drug trafficking. (El Norte)

Moved to mainspace by MX (talk). Self-nominated at 16:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Drive-by comment and not a review, but I'd suggest striking ALT0 as it's not exactly a great hook. ALT1 has potential, but I'd suggest you propose more hooks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:27, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
    • ALT2:... former police chief Zeferino Peña Cuéllar may have escaped through a secret tunnel during an attack from a drug cartel? Source: [Spanish] "Trascendio que posiblemente los investigadores buscaban un tunel que se cree esta en la finca. Eso, porque el dia de la balacera, un testigo escucho cuando unos de los pistoleros grito que los habitantes de la finca podian escapar por 'el tunel' ... En la misma finca, los federales aparentemente buscaban un tunel que se cree servia de refugio a [Zeferino Peña Cuéllar] en casos extremos ..." / [English] "It was reported that investigators were possibly looking for a tunnel that is believed to be on the farm. That, because on the day of the shooting, a witness heard when some of the gunmen shouted that the inhabitants of the farm could escape through 'the tunnel' ... On the same estate, the feds apparently looked for a tunnel that is believed to be used as a refuge to [Zeferino Peña Cuéllar] in extreme cases ..."
    • ALT3: ... Zeferino Peña Cuéllar had trouble recovering a seized property because he bought it from a Mexican drug lord? Source: [Spanish] A Don Zefe se le ha dificultado recuperar la finca de El Faisan, debido a que la UEDO se entero de que esa propiedad ... habia pertenecido al cerebro financiero del Cartel del Golfo, Carlos Resendez Bortolousi. / [English] Don Zefe has had a difficult time recovering El Faisan's estate, because UEDO learned that this property ... had belonged to the financial brain of the Gulf Cartel, Carlos Resendez Bortolousi.

Black Prince's chevauchée of 1355

  • ... that the Black Prince's chevauchée of 1355 marched 600 miles from Bordeaux to the Mediterranean and back through enemy territory without meeting any opposition? Source: Sumption, Jonathon (1999). Trial by Fire. The Hundred Years' War. II. London: Faber and Faber. ISBN 0-571138969 pp. 179, 181–184; Burne, Alfred (1999) [1955]. The Crecy War. Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions. ISBN 978-1840222104 pp. 254, 255–258.

Improved to Good Article status by Gog the Mild (talk). Self-nominated at 16:20, 18 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg Recent GA, of the usual high quality by Gog the Mild. QPQ done. DYK hook is interesting and checks out, although I would perhaps suggest adding "on the Atlantic coast" or something like that after Bordeaux, as many readers won't know why the Mediterranean is significant. Otherwise I would suggest replacing "the Mediterranean" with "Narbonne", also per the article lede. Furthermore, "without meeting any opposition" is perhaps a tad exaggerated, as there appear to have been clashes on the way ("The two advance guards met in a fierce clash on 20 November") and certainly there was a French army often present, although no pitched battle took place. I would suggest toning this down just a bit.
  • I might also propose an:

ALT1: "... that in 1355, the English marched 600 miles through French territory and took so much plunder that they discarded silver objects to be better able to carry off gold and jewellery?" Source: Rogers, Clifford J (1994). "Edward III and the Dialectics of Strategy, 1327-1360". Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. 4: 83–102. JSTOR 3679216. OCLC 931311378 p. 100. Constantine 19:38, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Hi Constantine, many thanks for looking this over. I like ALT1. Can we scrap ALT0 and just go with that? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:45, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Of course, and you are welcome ;-). That's good to go then Symbol confirmed.svg Constantine 19:53, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Nice hook, Cplakidas, but per Rule H2, you cannot approve your own hook. Could another reviewer take a look at this? Yoninah (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Ha. Just my luck. It is now an FA and it is still waiting for DYK. Apologies Yoninah, I should have realised that. I was carried away by the neatness of the hook. I have added the source. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 18[edit]

John A. Spizziri

  • ... that John A. Spizziri proposed allowing people to carry small amounts of prescription tranquilizers, after a man was arrested when Librium pills were found in a jacket that a dog had dragged away? "Arrest Of Patient Stirs Legislature" in The New York Times: "While on a visit in Wood‐Ridge on May 8, Mr. Schwam was carrying in an unmarked one‐inch green and brown vial ‘eight Librium capsules he had taken from a large bottle containing his monthly supply of 120 pills.... A neighborhood dog ran off with his denim jacket containing the vial. woman who later found the jacket but could not learn the owner's name took it to the police, who found the pills and arrested Mr. Schwam under a section ‐of the drug law that prohibits carrying dozens of types of pills and prescribed drugs in anything but the original, labled container provided by a pharmacist.... The new amendment, offered by Assemblyman John A. Spizziri, Republican of Franklin Lakes, would permit person with a legitimate need for a controlled drug to carry a two‐day supply of the pills or medication in any container")
    • ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)

5x expanded by Alansohn (talk). Self-nominated at 12:53, 22 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Symbol question.svg @Alansohn: This article is a five-fold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. A QPQ has been done. I think the article is unbalanced. It has a large paragraph, more than half the article in fact, discussing a criminal justice-related incident in detail, all for the sake of mentioning that Spizziri made a proposal to amend the law. So, was the law changed? Did he do nothing else worthy of mention in his whole life? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:31, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 19[edit]

Kontorhaus District

Montanhof detail
Montanhof detail

Created by Kvaloya (talk). Self-nominated at 12:50, 20 July 2019 (UTC).

  • Reviewing
  • Article is new enough, long enough, neutral and with no copyvio showing on Earwig.
  • Very well illustrated.
  • Hooks are short enough, eye-catching and of general interest.
  • The original hook I think is the better but it should be supported by an inline citation in English - perhaps using the same citation as ALT 1 or one of the English language citations in the linked cholera article.
  • Image appears free of copyright restrictions and has rollover text. It is detail from an image which appears in the article. The complete image which appears in the article would make the point better
  • Symbol question.svg Support original hook with English citation. Use original image from article. QPQ not yet done. Papamac (talk) 15:10, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Montanhof in Kontorhaus District
Montanhof in Kontorhaus District
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg This is the nominator's first DYK submission, so a QPQ review is not required. I agree that the full Montanhof image is more impressive, and we can let a promoting editor decide which to use. I don't see why an English source is needed if the German source is online and can be checked via Google translate or the equivalent. Pinging Papamac to see whether they wish to resume the review. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg Yes agreed. Wasn't aware that it was the nominator's first DYK submission. Papamac (talk) 09:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg @Kvaloya and Iainmacintyre: There are not nearly enough inline citations; DYK rules dictate there must be at least one per paragraph. The entire "notable buildings" section is six paragraphs long and only has one reference. 97198 (talk) 08:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @Kvaloya and 97198: Yes, point taken. As the 4 relevant references are in German I think the nominator will have to fix this. Papamac (talk) 16:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 20[edit]

Sogenanntes Linksradikales Blasorchester

  • Reviewed: Precious Legacy
  • Comment: Sorry, I was sure I nominated yesterday, but was probably interrupted and never picked it up.

Created by Gerda Arendt (talk). Self-nominated at 17:16, 28 July 2019 (UTC).

User:The Rambling Man is welcome to review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:43, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Since TRM hasn't responded yet and mainly to help out the backlog over at the WT:DYK unreviewed noms section, I'll be doing a review for now (though he is still free to give comments). The article meets length and creation requirements, no close paraphrasing has been found, I am assuming good faith for the German language sources, the hook is interesting, and a QPQ has been one. There are currently a number of concerns that prevent me from giving the tick at this time, however. Firstly, the sentence mentioning "so-called left-radical wind band" does not have a footnote, nor does the sentence about their performances at anti-nuclear events. Secondly, at 193 characters, the hook may need to be shortened per WP:DYKHOOK and WP:DYKSG#J8; @The Rambling Man: could you suggest a possible shorter form of the original hook, if that would be possible? Thirdly, there is no reference provided for the Members table. Finally, just a suggestion and not an issue (so this won't prevent approval), but for musical bands, it's more common to use the word "disband" instead of "dissolved" so it might be a good idea to use that wording instead. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the review, and you seem not to know anything about arbitration enforcement, - keep your innocence. If TRm added a single helpful comment he could be blocked for violating an arbitration restriction. It has just happened to Ritchie. Will look. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
The translation of the name is my own, how could I make a footnote? I repeated ref Glandien a few times. Their name is long, which makes the hook long, but I'd miss any of the three things mentioned. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:28, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
One option, although I'm not sure if you'd like it, would be to omit the name of the group and just pipe it using a shorter phrase. Like for example, instead of ... that the "so-called left-radical wind band" Sogenanntes Linksradikales Blasorchester played, it could instead say ... that a "so-called left-radical wind band" played or wording to that effect. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
You might have guessed that I don't like it ;) - The name is a program and provides the German flavour. Without it, it could be anywhere. I'd rather drop to try to translate:
ALT1: ... that the Sogenanntes Linksradikales Blasorchester wind band played at demonstrations against nuclear power and far-right politics, and at the Berliner Philharmonie?
ALT1 would have been fine to me (although I very much preferred the original hook), my main concern is that there's no explicit mention of "far-right" anywhere in the article, nor are such beliefs discussed as far as I can tell. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
I added a note explaining "Rock gegen Rechts" (Rock against Right), in the German article "ist ein unregelmäßig wiederholtes Motto von Konzertveranstaltungen gegen Rechtsextremismus" = a --- motto of concerts against extreme right nationalism, as in article Far-right politics. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:15, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Aleksei Grishin

Aleksei Grishin at the 2010 Winter Olympics
Aleksei Grishin at the 2010 Winter Olympics

Source: [31]

5x expanded by OhanaUnited (talk). Self-nominated at 02:15, 24 July 2019 (UTC).

Policy compliance:

Image eligibility:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Symbol possible vote.svg MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Article was over 5x expanded on the 20th (504 to 3287 bytes) and well over 1500 bytes. Hook is cited, short enough and interesting, though the "(pictured)" part in the main hook should be next to his name. I prefer the main hook as ALT1 suggests 2 gold medals were put up for sale. ALT1 would need to be rewritten in my opinion. The nominator has also done a QPQ though QPQ check suggests only one DYK has been given? If that's the case, then kudos for doing a QPQ!

Alternatively, there are some issues in the article. Primarily, there are sentences without citations throughout all 3 paragraphs of the Career section. As for the image itself, Flickr has it under a CC BY-NC 2.0 license, which makes this picture non-free. Therefore, it can't be used in DYk nor Commons. However, as the picture was uploaded on 27 February 2010, I'm not 100% sure whether it was under a free license before 2019. I'll be going through the sources as well for a plagiarism, neutral and accuracy check as well, but this is my first glance through.

Update: Earwig says 15% possible violation which is not bad. I would recommend rephrasing "his mother saw a newspaper advertisement seeking" as it's word for word, and I don't think it falls under WP:LIMITED. For neutrality, some of the wording suggests WP:EDITORIALIZING as it's changing the tone to the facts. "performance regressed slightly", "tepid start", "strong performance" and "performed poorly" are examples. I'm also not sure if adding all the stats for Kyle Nissen at the 2010 olympics is off-topic or not as it's shifts the focus to Nissen then back to Grishin.

As for verifiability, apart from the non-sourced parts, there are parts that are cited but have text next to it that do not appear in the adjacent citation. For example: I do not see any qualifications for the Nagano events in the la84foundation source. If i missed it, please let me know. Similarly, the sochi2014 source doesn't state that he was the only Belarusian medallist at Salt Lake City, nor does the Museum of Contemporary Belarusian Statehood source state the medal's worth (Google translate tells me the site is Belarusian National History Museum, so I think the article has the wrong museum). Finally, there are Original Research issues as well in terms of losing to Dimitri Arkhipov at Deer Valley in 2003, or skipping Apex in 2006.

Overall: the main issue is the verifiability in terms of unsourced information with a bit of inaccuracies and original research. Similairly, there are sentences with citations that are not supported in the sentences like the only medallist in salt lake city for belarus. On minor points, there is a possible off topic part for Kyle Nissen's stats at Vancouver, word for word copy about the newspaper advertisement that I feel doesn't fall under limited, and some non neutral phrasing like "performance regressed slightly" and "tepid start". Finally, I believe there's a licensing issue with the flickr picture, but that'd require confirmation with the Commons uploader. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

(edit conflict x 2) @MrLinkinPark333: Some sentences weren't cited because it would be needless repetition. Per WP:PAIC, the FIS reference is used for many results across multiple ski seasons. I guess I can move the FIS reference to the end of the paragraph rather than inserting them in the middle to make it compliant with PAIC. I'll cite more FIS references in places that are expecting them. You said "his mother saw a newspaper advertisement seeking" couldn't fall under WP:LIMITED. It is quite difficult to convey differently. I can't switch the mother part to parent without losing accuracy. Can't change newspaper to something else. I can shorten "advertisement" to "ad", but that is just word switching. I can change "seeking" to "looking", but again that is still too close to WP:Close paraphrasing for my comfort. I will take out the summarizing words since some can view it as editorializing. For the 2002 Salt Lake City medal, I'll make the connection better by citing that he won the bronze medal and the medal count (from IOC) was 1 bronze. And I'll continue to improve the article and references. I just had to submit it before 7 days is up (I fear I would forget so it's best to submit first and declare its eligibility).
ALT image: Grishin with Olympics gold medal in aerial freestyle skiing on a 2010 Belarusian stamp
ALT image: Grishin with Olympics gold medal in aerial freestyle skiing on a 2010 Belarusian stamp
Regarding the QPD check, I wouldn't trust the tool too much. I haven't done DYKs in a long while and most of them are super old (one each in 2007, 2008, 2009, and two in 2014). I stumbled upon his pre-improved article after he was in the news for putting his gold medal up for auction and found that his article is very short despite winning 2 Olympic medals. (And a trip to Belarus back in February this year certainly helped increase my interest in the coverage of this country.) About the competition image, the copyright was automatically checked by Flickr upload bot at the time of the upload. It is not uncommon for Flickr contributors to change their licensing after the upload. The bot takes a snapshot of the licensing status when it is uploaded to Commons. Alternatively, I can switch to the alt image which doesn't have licensing problems (not to mention that it also shows the gold medal).
I agree that the ALT1 hook can be misinterpreted if one reads it in a hurry. I wanted to give it some context. It's not only an Olympic gold medal up for auction, that medal happens to be the first Winter Olympics gold medal from that country that is up for auction. Here's ALT2 using ALT image for consideration:
OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:06, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: In order of your comments: If you moved the FIS references to the end of each paragraph, that'd work especially if multiple sentences are from the same source. For the newspaper ad, I think if you swapped "seeking" with something else and/or rephrase it a tiny bit, I'd be fine with that. I'll keep an eye out tomorrow on any edits/adjustments and let you know if something got missed. If you prefer the stamp photo instead for the lead, that'd work for me as stamps pass PD Belarus I've learnt. As for AlT2, mentioning it was Belarus's first gold changes the focus from Grishin's gold to Belarus's first gold. Maybe consider rewriting this one. Otherwise, the main hook would sound fine. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Overall update. I've been checking through your updates of the article and keeping track of what's left to be done (so far, all i see is one unsourced sentence). Let me know when you're finished with sourcing and I'll inform you if there's something missing or not. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:32, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Hello. I've noticed that you have not edited the article in a few days. I was wondering if you would like to continue with this nomination. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Yes I am. Just need to take a little break away from focusing exclusively on one article. OhanaUnitedTalk page 23:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Okay. I'll leave what needs to be done here for whenever you decide to come back to this nomination:
  • Verifilabity:
    • Missing citations, 1997 fis☑Y, 1998 olympic qualifications, 2000 world cup, 2004 world cup, 2006 world cup☑Y, 2011 did not enter, belarausian state univ.☑Y
    • inaccuracies: 2001 world cup, 2005 skiing (both need places reversed)
    • OR: 35 competitors 2004 world cup☑Y, skipping Apex in 2006☑Y,
  • Neutrality:
    • Words to watch: despite☑Y, strong
    • Non neutral: strong start 2005☑Y, strong performance 2010☑Y, mentioning the other competitors performances besides Grishin at 2010 Olympics☑Y
  • Close paraphrasing: newspaper advertisement

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I sourced the ones you identified. For the inaccuracies, I believe you may be confused with the skiing season which spans 2 calendar years (2001-2002 world cup began in September 2001 and finished in January 2002, just before the Olympics in February). Likewise for 2005-2006 ski season, but World Cup races continued after the Olympics. The FIS source showed that he did not participate in 2011/2012 competitions. I have also sourced or reworded the parts that you believe to be original research and the 2010 Olympic part. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:46, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Thanks for continuing to work on this. Here's an indepth explanation of the above that still needs work on:


  • For the 1998 Olympics, the la84foundation.org source doesn't mention the 217.84 points nor the 9th place finish he got to advance to the finals.☑Y
  • FIS individual events for the 2000-01 world cup doesn't mention 15 races or lower than the top five aerials/overall finish
    • Half resolved. The top five part was removed, but the 15 races is unverified. An source is needed to say that the season had 15 races, as this sentence is only cited by two individual races, not the season.
      • This one was swapped to 7 races with a source.☑Y
  • Need a source for the 2004-05 World Cup first four races and his top position of 11th place.☑Y
  • Need a source that shows he did not compete in 2011 and 2012 World Cups and 2011 World Ski Championship. Yes he competed in 2013, but the citation is for the 2012-2013 World Cup and doesn't support the other parts.☑Y
    • Maybe clarify he didn't appear in the 2010-11 and 2011-12 world cup seasons? currently it reads he did not compete in the "2011 or 2012 World Cup races" and that he reappeared for the 2012-13 season.☑Y
  • "beat the runner-up by 1.2 points" needs to be moved as the Sochi 2014 Olympics doesnt have the point difference.
    • Still no source that says he beat the runner up by 1.2 points at Sochi.
      • Misread. It was for Vancouver (thanks for pointing that out). Source was provided. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC) ☑Y

Minor issues:

  • For Mont Tremblant 2001, it should be fourth and second as he placed fourth on the 12th, then second on the 13th.☑Y
  • "In 2003-2004 World Cup," - minor grammar error☑Y
  • Changhun 2005 should be eighth and fifth as he was eighth on the 16th and fifth on the 18th.☑Y
  • "Strong performance" - 2006 Olympics reword for neutrality (Just noticed it today).☑Y
  • "good for 2nd place" - 2010 Olympics maybe reword for neutrality? (Just noticed it today).
    • This part was reworded to "achieving" . i think it's okay, but maybe switch to something like "resulting in"? achieveing sounds a tiny bit promotional but im so-so on it. If you disagree, i'll leave it.
  • Newspaper advertisement - still close paraphrasing but that can be dealt with last.

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Those issues should all be resolved except the newspaper one. I'm still not comfortable changing words without distorting the meaning. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:39, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: You're almost there. A source is needed for the 15 races at the 2000-01 world cup and the 1.2 point difference between 1st and 2nd place at Sochi. I'll keep thinking over the newspaper part and i've left a comment for achieveing. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:57, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Took me a while to understand that the 1.2 point difference was referring to the Vancouver Olympics, not Sochi. I've changed from 15 races to 7 because the source calendar shows only 7 races for aerial. OhanaUnitedTalk page 23:54, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Whoops I read that wrong. Thanks for the source. As for the 7 races, that doesn't 100% confirm it I think as Mount Butler was two days (unless that's the 4x part?). Also spotted a minor grammar error "a eighth" instead of "an eighth". --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:18, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
@MrLinkinPark333: Yes, 2 races in the "4xAE" (2 races each for male and female). Also fixed "an eighth" OhanaUnitedTalk page 00:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Okay then. All that's left is the "achieving" part and newspaper part. I tend to struggle with WP:LIMITED ones. I can ask for a second reviewer for the limited part only if you wish? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:29, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
I reworded slightly but there's no easy way to get around it. WP:LIMITED says Close paraphrasing is also permitted... [in] the case with simple statements of fact. It also does not copy any creative words or phrases, similes or metaphors. I believe this falls within the acceptable case. OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Fair enough. Those words (mother, ad, newspaper, skiing etc.) are general terms that can't really be reworded even after changing the sentence structure. How about rewording the word "achieving"? I think once that word is replaced (for neutrality), then I can check it off. Also, could you swap the picture in the lead for ALT1? Just so to prevent other editors from promoting the wrong picture. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Would "winding up" be a better substitute for "achieving"? And not quite sure if you meant the image swap (stamp image replacing the competition image) the in lead for this DYK nom or in the article. OhanaUnitedTalk page 22:10, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
@OhanaUnited: Winding up doesn't sound right, perhaps stick with a simpler word. As for the image swap, the stamp is more suitable in the hook (though having the flickr image in question in the article as a whole, i don't know per previous discussion). --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Maria Grapini

Maria Grapini
Maria Grapini
  • Comment: Now let's see, the entire article, which I have translated from its native rowiki, has only an unsourced DOB and birthplace and some of the words and grammar were lost in translation but other than that it's completely sourced.

Created by FoxyGrampa75 (talk). Self-nominated at 12:52, 20 July 2019 (UTC).

  • This is just a drive-by comment, but while both hooks are interesting, I can't help but feel that both might fall afoul of BLP. Would like to hear second opinions about this matter, though. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Narutolovehinata5, I think personally, the original hook might violate BLP. ALT1 would be better, though, because it says that the media attention from her spelling mistakes was the inspiration for an app, not necessarily saying anything negative about her. epicgenius (talk) 00:09, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Full review needed now that hook discussion has concluded. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:10, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol question.svg Article is new enough, long enough, adequately sourced, with the facts for both hook facts being cited inline. I am assuming good faith for the Romanian-language sources. Nominator has no prior DYK credits so a QPQ is not required at this time. Consensus in this discussion appears to favor ALT1, but just to make sure that BLP concerns won't be raised at some point, I'll be asking BlueMoonset for their thoughts on this matter. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:18, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol possible vote.svg Narutolovehinata5, I'm not the best person to ask where the line is for potential BLP issues in hooks, especially as regards ALT1 (the original hook was clearly a problem, so I've struck it). I do not see that ALT1's assertion of the media attention is supported by the source that mentions the Grapinizer, which merely describes how the app works when I look at it using Google Translate, so the sourcing needs work if ALT1 is okay to use from a BLP standpoint. However, the article itself needs a good copyedit before it's ready to be featured on the main page; there are a number of places where I don't understand what happened or where clearly the wrong word has been used. Perhaps a request should be made at the Guild of Copy Editors request page. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • @BlueMoonset: The source (when translated) says "criticized several times in the press", but it didn't look neutral enough, so I used "media attention". I'll try to make some adjustments and another alt-hook. And yes, I took it to WP:GOCER. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 15:34, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Technically, ALT1 is not yet suitable because the reference that verifies it does not appear at the exact sentence mentioning the fact, but rather at the one that comes after. Per the rules, a footnote or footnotes should be provided in all sentences where facts are mentioned, even if this is not normally required outside of DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:12, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Articles created/expanded on July 21[edit]

The Love Train

Improved to Good Article status by MaranoFan (talk). Self-nominated at 08:37, 22 July 2019 (UTC).

  • The stuff about the press release is interesting (much more so than the stuff about her upcoming album), but poorly phrased. I'll think about it. DS (talk) 23:12, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
How about, ALT2: ... that when Stephen Thomas Erlewine reviewed Meghan Trainor's EP The Love Train, he also reviewed the press release that promoted it? DS (talk) 23:17, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
I agree that the original hook I suggested is more interesting than ALT1. I’m just not sure if the fact that Erlewine reviewed the press release is interesting in itself, as ALT2 completely neglects describing what made the press release noteworthy.—NØ 00:53, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, it doesn't say why the press release was noteworthy... but that's what piques the reader's curiosity. Don't answer your own question. It was promoted with a press release - who cares? Lots of things are promoted with press releases. This particular press release got reviewed along with the item it promoted - what? That's weird, why did it get reviewed? *clicks link in order to find out* DS (talk) 13:07, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Abu Abdallah ibn al-Hakim

Created by Cplakidas (