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.
Comment: For those concerned about the swearing, I would highlight that the Boris Johnson tracks have been subject of a previous DYK which also made the main page, after much discussion.
Created by ISD (talk). Self-nominated at 09:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC).
Objecting on the same grounds as the late 2021 discussion, and we don't even have a Christmas excuse here. I mean, it's not about swearing in the first two cases, it made some people think that WP believes that Boris Johnson is (still) a fucking cunt, which showed why putting hooks with titles some (particularly Tory supporters in that case) would consider denigrating a sitting PM was a bad idea. Among other reasons, it's just perfect fodder for headlines like "Wikipedia is biased against conservatives" and, instead of attracting readers to the encyclopedia, it pushes them off. You seem to have doubled down on it, and I think that's an even worse case. We don't, DON'T say someone is a criminal unless a court has convicted that person in a fair trial, or if there is consensus among sources that he is a criminal and that there was a miscarriage of justice. A civil lawsuit settlement in New York doesn't really count because no guilt was admitted, and a civil court cannot convict a person of a crime. Yes, I know it's only a provocative song title, but running it on the main page has really bad optics on Wikipedia, particularly since some might think that the person/people promoting the hooks puts their seal of approval because they thoroughly hate Johnson and the Royal Family and let vent their views on Wikipedia. From a point of view of an outsider to Wikipedia and DYK in particular, that may be a reasonable thought when they first see the bullet point with the song title.
I have referred this nomination to a discussion on the talk page of DYK. I ask not to proceed with this nomination until the question of its appropriateness is considered. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 19:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
then the nom is on hold until the discussion is resolved. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 22:59, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
It seems that an alternative hook has been proposed by ISD (nominator) that was pretty much accepted during the discussion I mentioned earlier:
Overall: Earwig flags a few lines, but they seem to be quotes. @ISD: maybe you can explain what a nonce is and why that means something. --evrik(talk) 22:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
I've expanded the introduction to link to the Wiktionary entry for "nonce". Hope this is enough. ISD (talk) 07:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Objecting on the same grounds as the late 2021 discussion, and we don't even have a Christmas excuse here. I mean, it's not about swearing in the first two cases, it made some people think that WP believes that Boris Johnson is (still) a fucking cunt, which showed why putting hooks with titles some (particularly Tory supporters in that case) would consider denigrating a sitting PM was a bad idea. Among other reasons, it's just perfect fodder for headlines like "Wikipedia is biased against conservatives" and, instead of attracting readers to the encyclopedia, it pushes them off. You seem to have doubled down on it, and I think that's an even worse case. We don't, DON'T say someone is a criminal unless a court has convicted that person in a fair trial, or if there is consensus among sources that he is a criminal and that there was a miscarriage of justice. A civil lawsuit settlement in New York doesn't really count because no guilt was admitted, and a civil court cannot convict a person of a crime. Yes, I know it's only a provocative song title, but running it on the main page has really bad optics on Wikipedia, particularly since some might think that the person/people promoting the hooks puts their seal of approval because they thoroughly hate Johnson and the Royal Family and let vent their views on Wikipedia. From a point of view of an outsider to Wikipedia and DYK in particular, that may be a reasonable thought when they first see the bullet point with the song title.
then the nom is on hold until the discussion is resolved. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 22:59, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Ready for a new review. Per the WT:DYK discussion the original hook has been struck. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 04:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Earwig flags a few lines, but they seem to be quotes. @ISD: maybe you can explain what a nonce is and why that means something. --evrik (talk) 22:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)