Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Did you know

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you know?
Introduction and rules
IntroductionWP:DYK
General discussionWT:DYK
GuidelinesWP:DYKCRIT
Reviewer instructionsWP:DYKRI
Nominations
Nominate an articleWP:DYKCNN
Awaiting approvalWP:DYKN
ApprovedWP:DYKNA
April 1 hooksWP:DYKAPRIL
Holding areaWP:SOHA
Preparation
Preps and queuesT:DYK/Q
Prepper instructionsWP:DYKPBI
Admin instructionsWP:DYKAI
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
History
StatisticsWP:DYKSTATS
Archived setsWP:DYKA
Just for fun
Monthly wrapsWP:DYKW
AwardsWP:DYKAWARDS
UserboxesWP:DYKUBX
Hall of FameWP:DYK/HoF
List of users ...
... by nominationsWP:DYKNC
... by promotionsWP:DYKPC
Administrative
Scripts and botsWP:DYKSB
On the Main Page
Main Page errorsWP:ERRORS
To ping the DYK admins{{DYK admins}}

This is where the Did you know section on the main page, its policies, and its processes can be discussed.

Christmas DYK sets

[edit]
A. krampus living in Brazil

With Christmas just over four weeks away, I think this is a good time to ask: does DYK want to do sets for Christmas Eve and Christmas Day?

If yes, here are some potential hooks that can be used:

In addition, these articles are at WP:GAN and could potentially be used as Christmas hooks:

Thoughts about creating this set are welcome below. Z1720 (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent idea. I did actually see the Christmas Invasion in prep and wondered why it wasn't being saved. Pinging @DoctorWhoFan91, Piotrus, DimensionalFusion, Thriley, and Grimes2: who are involved with the first two noms. (I've been putting off expanding Piri & Tommy for over a year and they did a track called "Christmas Time" if that's of any use?)--Launchballer 15:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: Nominate it when its ready: if we decide not to use it for this set, the article will still be better. Z1720 (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine with me - I can review any new XMAS hook if pinged. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: I'm not really familiar with DYK- should I add somewhere that it should be saved for Christmas (I will read the instructions to DYK more comprehensively later). @Z1720: Great idea. Also, I'm working on another Christmas special- if it gets nominated and passed by then, I can nominate that for DYK too. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 11:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, what someone needs to do is pull the nom, leave a note, and put it in WP:SOHA. I've done that.--Launchballer 11:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas hooks should go into the "Special occasions" section at the bottom of the WP:DYKN page. Thanks guys! Gatoclass (talk) 14:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, they should go into the "Special occasions" section at the top of the WP:DYKNA page (direct link: WP:SOHA), and only once they're approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While not a "Christmassy" hook, it would be nice if Template:Did you know nominations/HMT Night Hawk could run on Christmas Day for the 110th anniversary of her sinking - Dumelow (talk) 20:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dumelow: Since the hook mentions Christmas, I think it is appropriate for the set. It will also help us diversity the setZ1720 (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can work up an article on a Brazilian Krampus species.--Kevmin § 17:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Me and @AirshipJungleman29: disagree as to the notability for Anna Holland; he believes that they do not meet WP:CRIMINAL but I believe that they meet WP:CRIMINAL#unusual crime. I'd appreciate another opinion on this. Also pinging @Crisco 1492: as reviewer.--Launchballer 02:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Older nominations needing DYK reviewers

[edit]

The previous list was archived yesterday afternoon, so I've created a new list of 30 nominations that need reviewing in the Older nominations section of the Nominations page, covering everything through November 6. We have a total of 307 nominations, of which 163 have been approved, a gap of 144 nominations that has decreased by 44 over the past 6 days. Thanks to everyone who reviews these and any other nominations!

More than one month old

Other nominations

Please remember to cross off entries, including the date, as you finish reviewing them (unless you're asking for further review), even if the review was not an approval. Please do not remove them entirely. Many thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who likes British naval history need a DYK project?

[edit]

Hi all. I just knocked off a quick stub on Thomas Fenner (sea captain) earlier today after creating a disambiguation page at Thomas Fenner. Naval history is not really my thing, but if anyone wants to work on expanding this beyond a stub, there was a lot more on this man in his Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry. I would imagine there would be lots of coverage in google books. He was Francis Drake's second-in-command during some major Elizabethan era Royal Navy events. Probably could make a good hook from this. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:02, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that the death of a squirrel named Peanut became a rallying cry before the 2024 United States election?

@AirshipJungleman29: This was brought up in the nomination, but the reviewer preferred ALT0 and I objected to ALT1 (the hook that was promoted) on interest grounds. I understand the nominator article creator preferred ALT1, but arguably ALT0 was the better hook in terms of meeting WP:DYKINT. Suggesting a swap. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 17:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator (me) also prefers ALT0. @Thriley: was the only person to oppose the hook.--Launchballer 17:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • (ec) If we had any sort of indication that the death of Peanut influenced the results, that might be more interesting for average readers, but given the media saturation that this had during the election (and the fact that it's not even two months behind us) I feel like ALT0 is definitely better for WP:DYKINT purposes.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I think the primary reason this got picked by national and international news was because of the election. It is still the primary reason it gets coverage one month later. This article from USA Today two days ago doesn't even mention only fans: [1] Thriley (talk) 18:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Primary reason for notability =/= hook, though. Otherwise every hook would be like "... that Zheng Zhegu was an actor and filmmaker with Mingxing?" — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      This squirrel was the subject of widely read stories that described its relationship to the election, which more than 153 million Americans participated in. It's compelling and hardly obscure. Thriley (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      You sure it's supported by the source? "The Longos said they bought their 350-acre spread near Elmira with the $800,000 that they made in one month posting their porn online. Then P’Nut started making big money with his separate fan base" sounds almost contradictory to what the proposed hook is saying. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the opposition to ALT1 and the concern raised about ALT0, I've gone ahead and pulled it for now. Discussion can continue on the nomination page. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please revert Narutolovehinata5, discussion can perfectly well continue here for a hook that is a week (!) away from running. The only objection to ALT1 that I can see is that it is less interesting than a hook not supported by the source. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, with how there's no consensus against ALT1 (four editors opposed as opposed to two in support), it's probably safer this way. We don't want to risk it ending up in Queue if discussion peters out. Besides, ALT0 is also problematic for the reason you raised, so it couldn't just be a simple swap: had it not been for the issue with ALT0, I wouldn't have done the pull. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 23:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Date request

[edit]

Last month I made a DYK nomination for Bob Hainlen. I recently realized that it might make a good special occasion hook for December 18, which will be the subject's 98th birthday. However, it appears the nomination was made a little outside of the six-week limit allowed for special occasion hooks. As per DYK guidelines (Exceptions to the six-week limit can be implemented by way of a local consensus at WT:DYK), I'm coming here to request an exception. Would having this be featured on December 18 be alright? Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. I'm sure others can enlighten me as to the history, but I suspect the six week limit is an artefact from when most nominations stayed on T:TDYK for less than that and is more than a bit daft when we time out noms after two months. I'd be inclined to do away with the rule.--Launchballer 23:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dropping the six-week limit has been discussed before and is actually something I'd personally support, but it's been shut down over logistical reasons (something about it being impractical to nominate articles then have them run much later), as well as violating the spirit of DYK's purpose (to highlight new and newly-improved content, with emphasis on the new part). If they ran too far, they wouldn't be new anymore. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:07, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was dropping it discussed before or after WP:DYKTIMEOUT was introduced?--Launchballer 01:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was before that, although the reasons for its imposition as well as the reasons to oppose it were separate from the concerns that led to DYKTIMEOUT. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diane Leather is up for adoption

[edit]

Does anyone want to adopt or write about Diane Leather? Her biography claims that she is the first woman to run a sub-5-minute mile. The nonimation is 9 days away from being two months old, and the nominator has not edited in a while. Flibirigit (talk) 01:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for review

[edit]

For Dune (Kenshi Yonezu song), I added two new DYK hooks and pinged all the DYK admins, but two days have gone by and no one seems to ready to point me in the right direction, and I'm not quite sure what the next step in the process should be, so I'm now requesting help here. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 09:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokisaki Kurumi: I see this is your first nomination. The first person to ask is Launchballer, so I have pinged him. TSventon (talk) 12:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tokisaki Kurumi: DYK rules get complicated. I would suggest looking at previous hooks going back from November and searching for "song" to see what has worked in the recent past. TSventon (talk) 15:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. ときさき くるみ not because they are easy, but because they are hard 17:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DYK admins: Just noting that although I just queued this (with 15 seconds to spare!), there are still significant issues with this set and I am now no longer able to edit it.--Launchballer 00:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, at least the Lizzie Esau hook on the next set is mine, so I'll need a hand with it if I queue that set.--Launchballer 00:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I approved the hook, so need more eyes.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer: Having read the sources, I'm concerned that the article may not be under its common name, which appears to be "Khan Younis". Additionally, the spelling used in the article name doesn't appear in the lead. Not sure this is a barrier to running, but it might need a move discussion. ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Onceinawhile:.--Launchballer 00:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pbritti’s question on commonname is one I wondered myself for some time. I ran an assessment of the sources and concluded that Barquq Castle (and its cognates, with different spellings and words for castle) is the more common name. I believe that scholarly and media sources shy away from calling it Khan Yunis because of the same reason we have WP:NATURALDAB as part of our own article title policy – it causes confusion with the name of the surrounding city.
There are many other options for the title, including the Arabic version Qalat Barquq, or Khan Yunis Castle, each with various spellings. We can have an RM or RFP on the title but this nuanced question is not related to DYK policies.
Onceinawhile (talk) 07:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I never noticed until now that the first word of the article said Burquq not Barquq! That was a typo - thanks for spotting.
On the change of Khan Yunis to Khan Younis, personally I find it confusing for Wikipedia to transliterate the same Arabic word differently in different places. Khan Yunis is how we name the city named after this building. Onceinawhile (talk) 07:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yakikaki, Gerda Arendt, and AirshipJungleman29: My apologies for not checking this before I brought it forward and therefore having to ping you twice. The hook for this needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've added it. Yakikaki (talk) 09:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Source appears to say Livonia, unless I'm reading it incorrectly, and the article and hook both say "the present-day Baltic states". Are these the same thing?--Launchballer 14:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FaysaLBinDaruL, Darth Stabro, and Crisco 1492: This article is 1454 characters, so slightly short of 1500. I'd be seriously tempted to IAR for an underrepresented topic like this, but I absolutely must have an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer article is given a little extension, now it's 1534. That would help. FaysaLBinDaruL (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29 after your edit, characters comes down to 1488, we need 12 more characters to reach 1500. Please kindly expand a bit. ~ Φαϊσάλ (talk) 15:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AirshipJungleman29 Thanks for copyedit. Now its 1505. ~ Φαϊσάλ (talk) 15:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This still needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Launchballer: Sorted on end-of-sentence citation requirement. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My concern has been resolved.--Launchballer 14:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this, so need more eyes.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm involved with this, so need more eyes.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JuniperChill: I don't see where this is in either of the cited sources and I'm struggling to see how it meets WP:DYKINT; something was always going to come fourth.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Coming fourth doesn't seem as impressive as coming first or even second, and while gaming is big, I imagine that many readers would not know what Steam Next Fest is and get its significance. Will be pulling within 24 hours if a new hook isn't proposed soon. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Proposing ALT1:
  • ALT1: ... that Tiny Glade was developed by a two-person studio and was the fourth most-played demo on 2024's Steam Next Fest?
Has the advantage of a pre-existing citation at the end of the sentence and notes that such a small team managed to pull off a fairly impressive feat. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Given that it's now in the next set, the hook will need a review and a swap from a sysop. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the delay. Its just that im on holiday until end if month. (see my user talk page for more) Anyway ALT1 looks better than what i proposed so im fine with using the alt hook. JuniperChill (talk) 02:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Crisco 1492: Needs a swap ASAP. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4: Both parts of this hook needs an end-of-sentence citation.--Launchballer 15:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ Launchballer I repeated the citation for the peace committee at the end of the sentence. It was in the source used after the following sentence which stated he was in that committee from 1950-1958. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, and I think "Li Peiji (李沛基) was tasked with killing Fengshan with explosives; if he were to fail, Chen and fellow revolutionary Zhou Huipu (周惠普) would ambush Fengshan near the Li Renxuan Medical Clinic." covers "would-be assassin".--Launchballer 15:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing 5x expansion; the version before expansion was 1,425 characters, whereas the current one is 6,474 characters (so 700 characters short). Pinging Alsoriano97, Dumelow, and AirshipJungleman29 (I see that the reviewer mentioned 1,222 characters; not sure where the different counts are coming from). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The text I counted as 1,222 is the below in green (arguably it should be lower at around 1,159 by excluding the Portuguese pronunciation guide which is a template). This excludes "wikitext, templates, lists, tables, section headers, image captions, block quotes, the table of contents, and references" per WP:DYKPROSE, I can get your count of 1,425 only by including the infobox, section headers and image caption - Dumelow (talk) 10:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Celeste Martins Caeiro (Portuguese pronunciation: [sɨˈlɛʃtɨ kaˈɐjɾu]; born 2 May 1933), also known as Celeste dos cravos ("Celeste of the carnations") is a Portuguese pacifist and former restaurant worker. Her actions led to the naming of the 1974 coup as the Carnation Revolution.Caeiro was born in 1933. She came to prominence during the revolution to overthrow Marcelo Caetano. She gave out red and white carnations to the soldiers, leading to the action of 25 April 1974 being known as the "Carnation Revolution". She was working in a self-service restaurant in Lisbon called "Sir" located at Franjinhas Building on Rua Braamcamp. The restaurant was opened on 25 April 1973 and for its first anniversary the owners planned to give out flowers to all its customers on 25 April 1974 but this had to be cancelled because of the coup. She was sent home and told that she could take the wasted red and white flowers.She offered the flowers to the tanks involved with the coup and they placed the flowers in the muzzle of their guns. The idea was copied and flower sellers donated more flowers to decorate the mutinous soldiers and their weapons. The anniversary of the Carnation Revolution is a national holiday in Portugal.
Dumelow, DYKcheck returns a result of 1425 characters for this article before expansion, that is the tool used for character count at DYK. Update: It seems that DYKcheck is miscounting the text, this is a problem - maybe it needs an overhaul? Gatoclass (talk) 13:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's picking up content from {{IPA-pt}}, which in turn comes from {{IPA}}, which invokes Lua and is thus beyond my knowledge. Editing the version before expansion to remove that template and showing preview gives me 1183.--Launchballer 14:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to note that WP:DYKPROSE states "DYKcheck is generally considered the authoritative counter of prose size, but manual counts are admissible as well". I am not sure why DYKcheck is considered "authoritative" when, as in this case, it can go awry - Dumelow (talk) 14:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before now, it's been considered the authoritative counter because other prose counters have proven to have issues and DYKcheck has not - AFAIK this is the first such issue to be encountered for DYKcheck. It needs to be fixed. Gatoclass (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not enthusiastic about the 5x rule, but given that we have it, and people seem to be enforcing it rigidly (vis-a-vis a request yesterday to add 12 characters to an article), we should at least have an authoritative tool that nominators can rely on to provide correct numbers, or at least the same numbers as a reviewer gets. RoySmith (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The x5 rule could use a tweak (should be less for bigger articles IMO) but that's another issue. Gatoclass (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps just a flat out character count? Say 5,000 or 6,000? TarnishedPathtalk 15:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that would not be appropriate IMO - it should be some sort of sliding scale. x5 for smallish articles, x3 for midsize, x2 for big ones - something like that. Gatoclass (talk) 15:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although now that it occurs to me, there is probably less need to tweak it now that users have the GAN path to nomination. Gatoclass (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My Simone Murphy hook wasn't technically a 5x expansion, but was approved anyway (the queuer actually cited IAR when they ticked it off). This could be formalised.--Launchballer 16:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the IAR on the 5x, but I'm less sanguine about Schwede66's basing his approval on an assumption about how a WP:GAN will end up. Looking at that another way, GAN needs all the help it can get; if you've read the article in sufficient detail to determine it meets WP:GACR, you should just review it there and help them clear out their backlog. RoySmith (talk) 16:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you meant to ping me, RoySmith. Schwede66 19:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure I did. You wrote Special:Diff/1225059149, no? RoySmith (talk) 19:19, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. But that was more than half a year ago; forgive me that I couldn't remember that. Schwede66 08:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just going to note that, once these are okay, I plan to also promote Prep 7.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abortion in Gabon

[edit]

I thought I'd point out that I've just modified the abortion in Gabon hook based on an Error report.

Copied from Errors:

... that while supporting a law easing restrictions on abortion in Gabon, Prime Minister Rose Christiane Raponda said "it is not yet the right time" for further legalization
"Legalization" is binary: something is either legal or it is not. You can't, therefore, have "further" legalization, any more than something can become "more legal". Suggest "further liberalization". UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for bringing that up, UndercoverClassicist. I have removed the phrase "for further legalization" from the abortion in Gabon hook as that qualification is not present in the article. Looking at the history, that qualification hasn't been removed by recent editing either. DYK hooks shouldn't make statements that aren't in the target article. Schwede66 07:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

End of copy.

Just in case anyone has an issue with my actions, please feel free to tweak things. Schwede66 08:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

I replaced the image in Queue 5 with an adjusted version (geometry and exposure correction). It's not great, but better than what was there before.

I suggest we not use the Lizzie Esau image in Queue 6. It's quite poor from a technical point of view. I tried to apply some exposure corrections, but couldn't make any substantial improvement. I looked through the other articles in this set and don't see any great images in any of them. Maybe Light Weight Air Warning Radar, but that's not wonderful either. RoySmith (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Using image

[edit]

While with most of my other DYK nominations I'm fairly indifferent about whether the image gets used, I think that the dual Third Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota)/Hamm Building DYK in Prep 4 really could benefit from showing the before/after image used in the nom. I'd appreciate a second look/opinion but no skin off my back if it remains where it is.~Darth StabroTalk  Contribs 15:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the DYK wizard's date check to prevent late nominations is imperfect

[edit]

See this link for details. Template:Did you know nominations/Charles Herman Allen managed to get through despite being a late creation, and even though the DYK wizard has a built in check that would block nominations from being created if an article was 10 days beyond eligibility. Maybe the the code needs to be fixed to prevent this from happening again? Courtesy ping to the nominator SammySpartan for details regarding how they were able to make the nomination using the wizard. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:39, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also curious why the tool didn't catch that, but it's only two days and this is a newcomer to DYK, so I'm inclined to IAR allow it. RoySmith (talk) 22:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Created just after half past one on 23 November and nominated just before half past eleven on 2 December, so I reckon just over 9.9 days. I'd take it.--Launchballer 22:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The tool gives a warning (but doesn't block) if an article is eight or nine days old, so maybe that's why it got through. I know if it's ten days or older it's a hard block. I can vacate the close given the responses above but I'd like to hear from the nominator first if they want to continue the nomination.
While we're here, this might also be a good opportunity to tighten up on the wizard's QPQ code since right now, despite some changes to the code, it still allows nominations without QPQs from QPQ-mandatory editors to get through. Given the change to requiring QPQs at the time of the nomination, we may need a more foolproof way to implement that since right now the current block is easy to bypass. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 22:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the closure of this review. The rules specifically allow nominations to be a day or two late, so nine days is not only allowed, it should be granted as a matter of course, especially to someone who is new enough not to need a QPQ. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to go further, since there was pushback on the review page. I am formally requesting that any current or future nomination by a new user—one with fewer than five nominations, and hence does not need to provide a QPQ themselves—that is nominated a day or two late be granted an extension from the standard seven days to eight or nine days as needed. It's new users who are least likely to know that they need to request the extension (experienced nominators shouldn't have that problem, though I'm sure some will), and since the trend at DYK seems to be an increasing strict interpretation of every word of the rules rather than AGF, I thought it was important for there to be more give for the newbies rather than more biting. Unless there is pushback against this request, the next obvious step is to codify this in the the rules so that reviewers know that a little kindness and leniency is once again in the rules of the road for our newest contributors. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. RoySmith (talk) 04:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support that. The rules across Wikipedia are rather complicated. Rjjiii (talk) 04:18, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm okay with that, but only if we are willing to make it clear that this is primarily intended for newbie editors. For experienced editors, it should be more case-by-case rather than an automatic extension grant (although in practice we do tend to be lenient anyway). My only real concern is that we have to make it clear to the newbie that the extension is only granted because they're new and they may get the impression that the limit is nine days by default even for established editors, though I'm not sure how such an idea can be expressed to them clearly. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's be a bit careful with the code, I've had it block a nomination less than a day old for whatever reasons, getting more complex may mean more potential bugs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flibirigit (talkcontribs) 06:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK Bot / Article Classification

[edit]

Greetings. I see that at the bottom of every nomination, there is an article classification that is introduced by DYKToolsBot. e.g., American biographies. I am assuming this information is aggregated somewhere to run some sort of analytics? How is this classification by the bot done? Is there a place where can I see the classifications? Context: I am thinking that this classification can be quite useful at WP:ITN to classify the nominations there too. While I am not a scripting ninja, I would like to hear some inputs and if there is someone here who can help -- would love that! Tagging RoySmith who has been marked as the owner / operator of the DYKToolsBot. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 17:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Ktin. The code that does this is on github. It uses some simple heuristics; see Article.is_biography() and Article.is_american() for the details. The intent was to help prep builders who needed to find specific types of articles to help maintain balance. I'm not familiar with the ITN internals, but my guess is it wouldn't be too hard to add some similar functionality there if somebody wanted to do the coding work. RoySmith (talk) 18:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RoySmith, speaking with my prep-builder hat on, would it be possible to add a third metric for "has an image"? Would be useful in thinking about what proportion of possible image hooks should run in the main body. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That seems pretty trivial, I'll see if I can crank that out the next time I'm deploying some new code. RoySmith (talk) 20:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29, Stephen Walch, and Tenpop421: I'm not sure we can say "wrong order" in wiki voice. That implies that there is some canonical correct order. I know very little about this topic, but New_Testament#Book_order says there are several possible orderings, depending on which authority you believe. RoySmith (talk) 22:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There came to be "some canonical correct order" in the Western Church (Matt, Mark, Luke, John), but that still had exceptions around 800, & what the Greeks did I don't know. It's not a case of "which authority you believe" but of where and when. Our section isn't very clear or complete. Johnbod (talk) 04:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @RoySmith: how about "wrong intended order", as the article points out the current order John, Luke, Mark and Matthew of the codex is not the one that it was meant to be (Matthew, John, Luke and Mark). Would that suit? Stephen Walch (talk) 01:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is more of a sanity check or a strawpoll rather than raising an issue. This was the promoted hook, while the alternative was:

  • ... that Gail Damerow's book described by the New York Times as the "authoritative book on ice cream" was created because of the lack of good recipes in her ice cream maker's recipe booklet?

Which is 190 characters, but is beside the point. The reservation I have is I'm not sure if the first hook works if people don't know who Cesar Millan is. I personally know who he is, but many readers may not. So this is more of a strawpoll from the others here: does the hook work without knowing Millan? And is the promoted hook more interesting or a better option than the alternative? Courtesy ping to promoter AirshipJungleman29 and reviewer Toadboy123, although input from uninvolved readers is appreciated. In the interest of transparency: I prefer the other hook, but this is a strawpoll to test consensus, and if consensus is in favor of the promoted hook then I won't object. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Launchballer: Do you know of a way to trim ALT1? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:29, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
... that Gail Damerow wrote the "authoritative book on ice cream" because of the lack of good recipes in her ice cream maker's recipe booklet? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:43, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But looking at the source, I see that it actually says "one of the most authoritative books on ice cream making", which is quite different in a couple of ways. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]