Template:Did you know nominations/32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Kingsif (talk) 16:17, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests

(

)

A candle-lit US Consulate, Hong Kong on the night of 4 June 2021

... that a pro-establishment legislator said the HK government ought to be "forthcoming and tell the public that the [32nd anniversary] vigil was not ... just banned because of the pandemic as claimed"? Source: Disband or risk prosecution, vigil organisers warned, RTHK
- ALT1:... that a pro-establishment legislator said the HK government ought to admit that the 32nd anniversary memorial of the Tiananmen protests "was not ... just banned because of the pandemic as claimed"? Source: Disband or risk prosecution, vigil organisers warned, RTHK
- ALT2:... that the US consulate in Hong Kong lit hundreds of candles (pictured) to commemorate the 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests? Source: "China Blasts US And EU Consulates In Hong Kong For Tiananmen Candles". International Business Times. AFP. 4 June 2021.
- Reviewed: see User:Ohconfucius/DYK#QPQ

Created by Ohconfucius (talk). Self-nominated at 12:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC).

Date and length fine. However I have a few issues with the hooks. First of all we should say Hong Kong, not HK (which sadly would put ALT1 over the character limit), secondly "pro-establishment" seems a little WP:LOADED to me, Would "pro-Beijing" be better? The Embassy one is good but less hooky than the originals so I'll let @Ohconfucius: decide how he wishes to proceed. Also, can you please clarify for me what you are using as a QPQ? No close paraphrasing and could you ping me when its done and I can have another look at it. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

"Pro-Beijing" would be acceptable, because it's a commonly-used term. In that case, would it be possible to simply say "the government" using a pipe? so we would have:

ALT3b:... that a pro-Beijing legislator said the government ought to admit that the 32nd anniversary memorial of the Tiananmen protests "was not ... just banned because of the pandemic as claimed"?

For the QPQ, I was thinking of applying Emrullah İşler if it remains valid. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 23:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ohconfucius: That's from 7 years ago. I could AGF on it at a stretch but have you got a more recent one? I know there was a discussion recently about time limiting QPQs so I would feel much better if you could provide one that's more recent please. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 08:18, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

I'll get reviewing something, possibly tonight. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 10:11, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

ALT3: ... that on the 32nd anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, the traditional venue for memorials in Hong Kong lay empty for the first time in thirty-two years? Source: "A Hong Kong park that traditionally hosts huge vigils on the anniversary of China's deadly Tiananmen Square crackdown lay empty for the first time late Friday [4 June 2021] [...] Police threw cordons around Victoria Park...leaving the venue free of candle-carrying mourners for the first time in 32 years." AFP (2021-06-04) "Hong Kong park empty for first time in 32 years on Tiananmen anniversary"

@The C of E and Ohconfucius: what do you think? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:46, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Seems good to me but i'd like to hear what the nominator @Ohconfucius: has to say. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 22:21, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. It's acceptable but is not my preferred choice, but the advantage is that it gets us under the maximum number of characters. -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 23:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

@The C of E: Since the nominator is OK with the new hook, this review looks like it is almost ready for completion. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@BuySomeApples: It's not the hook that's the problem, it's the fact that @Ohconfucius: has not provided a QPQ and having thought about it, I cannot accept one thats from 7 years ago. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 21:24, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I see, I misread the chain of comments. In that case pinging @Ohconfucius: to provide a recent qpq, otherwise I'll mark this for closure. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the lack of action on my part. I'm currently on the road, and will be back properly in two weeks. If this nomination will have passed its time limits by then, you may close it. Cheers, - Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 05:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

I'd be willing to review a nomination and donate it for this one. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Rotideypoc41352, please feel free to do so. This seems to be stuck without a contemporaneous review. Thank you for the offer. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@BuySomeApples: I shall donate one of my reviews to get this rolling: Template:Did you know nominations/Allen Hall Theatre – subpage Allen Hall Theatre Schwede 66 22:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

@The C of E: courtesy pinging nom, as Schwede66 has very generously donated a QPQ. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 13:57, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

, for ALT3. Thanks User:Schwede66. Drmies (talk) 19:18, 13 August 2021 (UTC)